On 14. 06. 21 20:09, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
On ma, 14 kesä 2021, Ben Cotton wrote:
[...]
==== PyPI Parity ====
Machine-readable metadata (''distribution'' names in
<code>dist-info</code> directories on disk and the corresponding
<code>python3.Xdist(foo)</code> RPM provides) will match the Python
Package Index (PyPI).
This solves a ''namespace'' issue. Python packaging tools use a flat
namespace,
and PyPI is ''the'' place where open-source Python packages are generally
published, so users and tools assume a package called
<code>requests</code>
is whatever <code>requests</code> means on PyPI.
While this is not ideal (especially for private packages), it makes sense
for Fedora to align with the PyPI namespace.
Note that Fedora package names are not affected – just the Python
packaging
metadata on disk and virtual RPM Provides generated from it.
The new guidelines cover what to do for packages that cannot be
registered
on PyPI. The Change owner is prepared to help with PyPI registration.
Note that names found in Fedora but not on PyPI
[https://github.com/pypa/pypi-support/issues/355 have been reserved on
PyPI]
to avoid being taken by unrelated projects.
samba has extensive Python C bindings but does not use PyPI at all. We
don't want to, we don't need to, it is technically not possible without
building Samba from scratch and it would not make it usable for PIP
install without a stricter coordination of the non-Python dependencies
-- that's what Linux distributions do.
In addition, 'samba' name is taken by an unrelated package on PyPI which
was not updated since 2019. For us this namespacing enforcement would
only be a problem.
Then I'd recommend that the project name in dist-info metadata would be,
for example "samba-bindings".
This matters in cases like a pip-installable package declaring a
dependency on Samba bindings: it now can't use `samba` because that
means something else on PyPI.
I fully agree about not installing Samba itself via pip.
(Also, this is one of the cases that might take a decade -- I'm not
putting pressure on you to implement this, but pointing out a direction
for the future.)
=== Burdening packagers ===
[https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/IYBF5GX6HVQYPC5EJ6HVK7GJHAIKHVBK/
Neal]
does
“not necessarily disagree that PyPI and Fedora pythonXdist() names
should match, but [he disagrees] on burdening packagers with this.”
However, actually pushing a package to PyPI (and maintaining it there)
is not necessary.
The minimal-effort solution is to ''reserve'' the name on PyPI
so that a conflicting package can not be created there.
The author of this change is willing to do this work for all
Python packages whose upstream is not on PyPI;
packagers need to send a request to the Python SIG list.
If something happens to me, Red Hat's python-maint team is also ready
to do this, and in the event of catastrophic management change,
PyPI maintainers can be e-mailed directly.
This is all described in the new guidelines (see the ''PyPI parity''
section).
The new guidelines discourage the minimal-effort solution because it is
suboptimal ''for users'' (and for the wider Python ecosystem).
In case of Samba I would argue that going with anything but
minimal-effort is actually suboptimal to users.
I agree; Samba is a special case.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
