Django packages - proposed name changes

[Bohuslav Kabrda]

It seems actually, that there are pretty straightforward guidelines for renaming packages:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Renaming_Process#Re-review_required
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages

So if renaming, we will _have to_ re-review. Also, the guidelines are pretty clear with the Provides and Obsoletes, so it shouldn't really be a problem.

Bohuslav.

----- Original Message -----
> ----- Original Message -----
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> > 
> > On 18/01/12 10:38, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
> > > Hi Pythonists! in RHBZ #736776, Yury V. Zaytsev proposed renaming
> > > all Django packages (including Django itself) to python-django-*.
> > > This change is suggested because of current inconsistent state:
> > > Django and Django-south packages start with capital letters,
> > > other
> > > Django extension libraries start with lowercase letters -
> > > django-*.
> > > Also, since Django is a Python framework (not a standalone app),
> > > all of the modules should have 'python-' prepended. Personally, I
> > > agree with Yury and I think we should make this change. Here are
> > > the steps that I propose: - discuss it on this list - ask FPC
> > > what
> > > they think - create a special section in Python packaging
> > > guidelines for packaging Django extensions/libraries, if we agree
> > > that we should do this change - perhaps postponing this change to
> > > F18 might be a good idea
> > > 
> > > Note, that this change should not affect applications written in
> > > Django, only Django itself and its extensions/libraries. I would
> > > also consider using some kind of virtual provides, so that if
> > > someone types "yum install django", it will work - maybe each
> > > Django extension/library could have a virtual provide like
> > > "Provides: django(foo) = %{version}".
> > > 
> > > So, what do you think?
> > > 
> > > Regards, Bohuslav.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > python-devel mailing list python-devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/python-devel
> > Hi,
> > 
> > renaming requires a re-review of packages.
> 
> Yep, I know, but I think we shouldn't let this hold us back. The
> packages have already passed once, so I think it wouldn't be much of
> a pain.
> 
> > 
> > I think, this step should become synchronized with other packages,
> > such
> > as squirrelmail -> php-squirrelmail (and other php packages, such
> > as
> > renaming cups-php to php-cups. Naming should be implemented
> > constistently throughout the distribution. Could we use this
> > renaming
> > to implement any other renaming of packages without requiring
> > re-reviews?
> > 
> 
> I think that we should solve Python and leave PHP to PHP guys. PHP
> has its own guidelines, and if they are not creating and approving
> packages that conform with the guidelines, it's their fault (but I
> agree that they should do something like that, too). I'm not sure if
> the renaming can be achieved in any other way than re-reviewing, but
> I think that the number of Django packages is not that high, so
> let's stick with re-reviewing.
> 
> > Maybe the described solution via virtual provides could solve the
> > actual problem. Newer django-packages should be packaged as
> > python-django-foobar
> > 
> 
> I see your point, but what I meant was that the packages should be
> named properly (python-django-*) and have a virtual provide
> django-*. I think it's not so big transition that we wouldn't be
> able to get it to F18 (but I would recommend against getting it to
> F17, as time is short).
> 
> > The latter would just need a provenpackager and some time to adjust
> > requires and provides of packages.
> > 
> > Disadvantage would be ballooning of the requirement solver tree in
> > a
> > package manager.
> > 
> 
> We have the virtual provides everywhere in Ruby packages and it works
> fine - and there are much more dependencies there, so I think this
> shouldn't be a problem.
> 
> > Thoughts?
> > - --
> > Matthias Runge <mrunge at matthias-runge.de>
> >                <mrunge at fedoraproject.org>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> > 
> > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPFql7AAoJEOnz8qQwcaIWylgIAIvWjibDXtmGnbQZ1+5vLo/M
> > genSkRCDr15geLcxrMKYZ7H7V07Q42vt8LGAj9AddFRLGROlKNfqrvsU9uGgrIkV
> > uZb9sd97ZcyON5PQKwYnSzcLTXM+Un1/ZOejCHiOuqM8BrK5llZXU0sYhzckX4++
> > EehFczZ8TTRW8ExRoZKGdvP2ontmRiJWjz8vy4igzMhQjzdgSNCsCX6h3iaeAJ15
> > fcOnBzj76smf+9QJSQaveRaDCaMfme7YtKnxFB7ds9IyrGMmLWtXB6VFc6VT1mft
> > MqSP3FVdEXC+8KZpfA8UPB8JJO8NTpVoSMNLIFdLrLserQdvkLxD7NxEQ/TUOT0=
> > =h5IF
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > _______________________________________________
> > python-devel mailing list
> > python-devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/python-devel
> 
> Regards,
> Bohuslav.
> _______________________________________________
> python-devel mailing list
> python-devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/python-devel