On 10/29/2009 06:27 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
I rather like the idea of standardizing on a "python3-" prefix for _all_ Python 3 module packages and subpackages, even if this leads to inconsistencies with their counterparts in the python 2 stack. It would make the "threeness" of the packages stand out more. Thoughts?
Initially this sounds good to me. Because python 2 and python 3 are incompatible it's probably important we separate them at the packaging level, this seems like a good approach as any (even with some warts on the corner cases).
However package maintainers might not like the idea of having to maintain double the number of their packages for an interim period and I could see them wanting to have just one package that installs into both the python2 and python3 library locations. Also perhaps we don't want to inflate the number of python packages by 2x. Having not followed this discussion from it's outset I'm wondering if we might want to consider allowing a single python package to support both python versions. I'm sure there are multiple reasons why this is a horrible idea, but I thought I would throw it out for consideration and let it get shot down :-)
-- John Dennis <jdennis@xxxxxxxxxx> Looking to carve out IT costs? www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/ -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
