https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1368911 --- Comment #7 from "FeRD" (Frank Dana) <ferdnyc@xxxxxxxxx> --- Great to see movement on this, thanks Ankur! (In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #6) > > https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-mpd2/python-mpd2.spec If I'm reading that right, wouldn't the python2 package still be built as python-mpd2-0.5.5-20170705git05510bb%{dist}.noarch.rpm, and merely offer python2-mpd2 as one of its Provides? Wouldn't it be better to build the module packages as python2-mpd2 and python3-mpd2, respectively? See e.g. (as a random pick) python-tempdir.spec which does so: https://src.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/python-tempdir.git/tree/python-tempdir.spec Something I also ended up doing when I built my own python-mpd2 RPMs (though I'm not sure if it's permissible under the Fedora packaging guidelines): Since python2-mpd2 is a drop-in replacement for python-mpd, might it maybe even make sense to have python2-mpd2 additionally Provides: python-mpd (and also Obsoletes:), instead of (or in addition to) Conflicting with it? Then mpDris2 wouldn't _have_ to be repackaged in order to deploy python-mpd2, as it Requires: python-mpd. (I realize that the plan is to repackage mpDris2 anyway, of course, so changing its Requires is not a big deal. But in the interest of not breaking compatibility for people who may have various things installed...) *shrug* More an idle though that anything, which I realize isn't exactly what Bugzilla is meant for. So, feel free to ignore this tangent, and just focus on the package naming question. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
