On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@redhat.com> wrote:

On 9.3.2017 01:53, Marcin Dulak wrote:

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Orion Poplawski <orion@cora.nwra.com
<mailto:orion@cora.nwra.com>> wrote:

On 03/07/2017 10:16 AM, Marcin Dulak wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have doubts about https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python
<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python>
>
> "For other executables, the general rule is:
>
> If only one executable is to be shipped, then it owns its own slot and should use /usr/bin/python3 from Fedora 22 on."
>
> The problem is discussed here
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1430020
<https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1430020>
>
> Please note that I prefer to keep the same spec file for Fedora and EPEL, otherwise it's too much burden maintaining it.
> I need help for correcting the spec so it complies with the guidelines, and makes sense for the users of the package.

My $0.02:

- I would suggest shipping the /usr/bin scripts in an 'idstools'
sub-package
that requires the appropriate python?-idstools package.

but the scripts contain different shebangs depending on the python version,
so the sub-package cannot be really named independently of the python
version.

For now I went with the standard way of providing all those script-2.X,
script-2, script-3.X, script-3, script
in the appropriate packages.

If the executables provide the same functionality on both Python versions, you SHOULD not do this.

then how can I make the executables (scripts) available for both python2 and python3?

The script differ only in the shebang line.

Marcin