https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264463 --- Comment #16 from Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Maxwell G from comment #15) > I preferred the previous approach where you included the Python metadata. > PyPI is the primary distribution channel, and I don't think including the > Python package adds _too_ much extra complication. It seems strange to me to > use the sdist but not build a Python package from it. Do you like the original approach of having a separate python3-cramjam-cli package, with a fully-versioned dependency on the base package, to carry the metadata and the Python interpreter dependency? Miro and Fabio, what do you think? I’m kind of taking a poll here. I think either approach (package metadata or don’t) is defensible, and neither approach is going to burden me too much. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264463 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202264463%23c16 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-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/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
