Wrong package name

[Fabian Affolter]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi all,

Recently I created a package python-aiohttp and this package was
approved, imported, and built. But I made a mistake and took the wrong
name for the package.
The package runs only with Python 3. As pointed out in the review
request [1] the correct name should be python3-aiohttp.

Do I need to open a rename request to fix that?

Kind regards,

Fabian

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1148982
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlQ1JCMACgkQ4jzS3TakOX91IwCffF/+1xTuc6N4GT/P5B5S6OQH
> an8An2CAEAOx5Kmsjb6O2igenMMo9nGk
> =k4/F
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Michael Schwendt]

On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 13:46:43 +0200, Fabian Affolter wrote:

>  Recently I created a package python-aiohttp and this package was
>  approved, imported, and built. But I made a mistake and took the wrong
>  name for the package.
>  The package runs only with Python 3. As pointed out in the review
>  request [1] the correct name should be python3-aiohttp.
>  
>  Do I need to open a rename request to fix that? 
I'm not convinced it is the "wrong name". Note that you could still
build a binary python3-aiohttp package from a python-aiohttp src.rpm!
That's what dozens (hundreds?) of other Python Module packages do,
either because they build for multiple versions of Python or because
they had been added a long time before Python 3 became available.

=> I would keep it as is and not worry too much, but make sure you
use the python3- prefix for the binary builds to adhere to the
guidelines.

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:27:27PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>  On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 13:46:43 +0200, Fabian Affolter wrote:
>  
>  > Recently I created a package python-aiohttp and this package was
>  > approved, imported, and built. But I made a mistake and took the wrong
>  > name for the package.
>  > The package runs only with Python 3. As pointed out in the review
>  > request [1] the correct name should be python3-aiohttp.
>  > 
>  > Do I need to open a rename request to fix that?
>  
>  I'm not convinced it is the "wrong name". Note that you could still
>  build a binary python3-aiohttp package from a python-aiohttp src.rpm!
>  That's what dozens (hundreds?) of other Python Module packages do,
>  either because they build for multiple versions of Python or because
>  they had been added a long time before Python 3 became available.
>  
>  => I would keep it as is and not worry too much, but make sure you
>  use the python3- prefix for the binary builds to adhere to the
>  guidelines. 
Could just using Provides: python3-aiohttp suffice?

Building two binaries for the same python stack seems a little bit of a waste of
resources.


Pierre

[Michael Schwendt]

On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:48:30 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:

>  Could just using Provides: python3-aiohttp suffice?
>  
>  Building two binaries for the same python stack seems a little bit of a waste of
>  resources. 
Why two?

python-aiohttp src.rpm does not need to build a package for %name.
It can build "subpackages" with other names.

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:52:45PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>  On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:48:30 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>  
>  > Could just using Provides: python3-aiohttp suffice?
>  > 
>  > Building two binaries for the same python stack seems a little bit of a waste of
>  > resources.
>  
>  Why two?
>  
>  python-aiohttp src.rpm does not need to build a package for %name.
>  It can build "subpackages" with other names. 
Ah ok. I had mis-understanding your idea, should work and reflect reality nicely


Pierre

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Wednesday, 08 October 2014 at 17:00, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>  On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:52:45PM +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>  > On Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:48:30 +0200, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
>  > 
>  > > Could just using Provides: python3-aiohttp suffice?
>  > > 
>  > > Building two binaries for the same python stack seems a little bit of a waste
> of
>  > > resources.
>  > 
>  > Why two?
>  > 
>  > python-aiohttp src.rpm does not need to build a package for %name.
>  > It can build "subpackages" with other names.
>  
>  Ah ok. I had mis-understanding your idea, should work and reflect reality nicely 
Exactly. If you have an empty %files section for the main package (or
none at all) and populate just %files -n python3-aiohttp, you'll end up
with one binary package with a correct name.

Regards,
-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org
"Faith manages."
        -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"