----- Original Message -----
Yeah, now that it all comes back to me, naming conflicts with SCLs
is
probably
the biggest issue. The fact SCLs weren't given a prefix is a major issue for
many possible EPEL packages.
On 12/11/2014 09:46 AM, Carl George wrote:
> One thing to look out for would be SCL mod_wsgi. In the SCL world they
> name
> it python33-mod_wsgi. Most modules are %{SCL}-python-%{module}, but
> mod_wsgi
> is unique. To avoid conflicts, the IUS project has committed to using the
> suffix "u" on our packages going forward (python34u-mod_wsgi). Are you
> concerned at all about naming conflicts with SCL packages?
>
> I added the IUS coredev mailing list to the CC line.
>
> Carl George
> IUS Community Project
Good points, both.
The thing that I forgot to mention is that it was decided that new RHSCL collections will
be prefixed with "rh-", hence giving "rh-python34" and similar.
Therefore we don't have to be afraid of any naming conflicts - if and when Python 3.4
is packaged for RHSCL, it won't conflict with the proposed python34 EPEL stack (not
now, not in future).
Slavek
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* epel-devel-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> [epel-devel-bounces(a)lists.fedoraproject.org] on behalf of Stephen John
> Smoogen
> [smooge(a)gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 02:24 PM
> *To:* EPEL Development List
> *Subject:* Re: [EPEL-devel] Proposal for Python 3 packaging in EPEL 7
>
>
>
> On 10 December 2014 at 03:48, Bohuslav Kabrda <bkabrda(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:bkabrda@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I know I've been promising this for quite some time to several people,
> so
> I finally managed to put together a proposal for packaging Python 3 in
> EPEL 7 (it'd also scale to EPEL 6 for that matter).
> I've created a wiki page [1] with the proposal and I'd like to hear
> comments and thoughts on it. There are some TODOs and variants in few
> places - I'd like to hear your opinions on these, or perhaps
> suggestions
> on better approaches.
> I'll create new documents with the updated proposal at some points
> during
> the discussion, so that people can easily see where the proposal is
> going
> without having to compare wiki revisions.
>
> Is there any other list/interested parties that should be put in CC of
> this mail? If so, please feel free to respond and do that yourself.
>
>
> THis proposal looks good at first blush. I think the time for retirement of
> python3X to python3(X+1) can be anywhere from 6 weeks to 2 months (if that
> isn't too long).
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Regards,
> Slavek Kabrda
>
> [1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bkabrda/EPEL7_Python3
> _______________________________________________
> epel-devel mailing list
> epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> <mailto:epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
>
>
>
>
> --
> Stephen J Smoogen.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> epel-devel mailing list
> epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
>
--
Orion Poplawski
Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222
NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702
3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)nwra.com
Boulder, CO 80301
http://www.nwra.com
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list
epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
--
Regards,
Slavek Kabrda