Python guidelines cleanup

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

>>>>> "ZJ" == Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek at in.waw.pl> writes:

ZJ> There's a dead link in "Example common spec file".

Oops, missed a colon.  Fixed, thanks.

ZJ> I wrote that. I turns out, which I didn't know at the time, that
ZJ> this is only true for binary modules (for example python-systemd has
ZJ> build/{lib,temp}.linux-x86_64-{2.7,3.4}).  For pure-python modules
ZJ> it seems to use a single build directory, but separate build/scripts
ZJ> directories.

Oops.

ZJ> So I think the detailed justification should be removed, and the
ZJ> first paragraph of "Example common spec file" replaced with
ZJ> something like this:

ZJ> "The following is a very simple spec file for a module building for
ZJ> both python2 and python3. It builds both versions in the same
ZJ> directory; this is possible because build products for different
ZJ> versions of Python usually do not conflict."

I've done that.  However, the following occurs to me: don't the existing
%py*_build and %py*_install macros have enough information to do the
necessary directory making, copying and pushd/popds to make this "just
work" regardless?  Can't we simply do that, hide all of the details and
nuke the whole "separate build directories" thing from the guidelines?

 - J<