-----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
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.
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
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.
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
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,
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski -
Fabian Affolter -
Michael Schwendt -
Pierre-Yves Chibon