On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 11:15:55AM -0600, Ian Weller wrote: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 05:59:00PM +0100, Nicola Soranzo wrote: > > Il giorno ven, 03/02/2012 alle 09.47 -0600, Ian Weller ha scritto: > > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 02:44:55PM +0100, Nicola Soranzo wrote: > > > > - python-apipkg, review request https://bugzilla.redhat.com/652034 > > > > > > Just looked a little bit more and it looks like python-py is bundling > > > this from upstream, and that's not okay either :) So I'll add that > > > review request to the list and also note that I need to submit a bug > > > against python-py to unbundle apipkg. > > > > It looks like that both apipkg and py are maintained by the same guy > > (Holger Krekel): > > > > http://bitbucket.org/hpk42/apipkg > > https://bitbucket.org/hpk42/py > > > > apipkg is probably just a subset of py. > > I'm going to ask upstream if apipkg is updated properly in py, and then > ask the python-py maintainer to add a Provides: python-apipkg. And then > close the python-apipkg review request assuming that all goes through > just fine. > > Or maybe I'll ask FPC. > > (This is stupid.) > I haven't inspected code, just file locations and names but it looks like it should be unbundled and packaged separately. pyhton-py includes: /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/py/_apipkg.py This is not a toplevel module and it's marked as private (_* is convention for private). So the module in py is not equivalent to a separate package. Which means that we don't have two packages providing the same thing. We have one package that's bundling another. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgpbWQPOS0WIx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- docs mailing list docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs
