If, for functionality reasons, you would prefer to ship the binaries with both packages
you can find some information here on how to do that:
Associate Software Engineer
Python Maintenance Team, Red Hat
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marcin Dulak" <marcin.dulak(a)gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2017 10:26:30 PM
Subject: [Fedora-packaging] Re: Clarification of python packaging guidelines
MD> Hi, I have doubts about
MD> "For other executables, the general rule is:
MD> If only one executable is to be shipped, then it owns its own slot
MD> and should use /usr/bin/python3 from Fedora 22 on."
What's the doubt you have? The guideline seems clear, though I have
never been happy with that wording.
my doubt is: if I only provide python3 scripts and user installs python2-idstools then he
a non-functional program - the scripts are absent. In order to correct this should I
Requires of the python2 package on the python3 one?
MD> Please note that I prefer to keep the same spec file for
MD> EPEL, otherwise it's too much burden maintaining it.
Depending on how extensive your dependencies are, you might just be able
to use the EPEL python3 packages. (Even EPEL6 has them.) That's
probably the easiest way, but at some point you have to accept that you
are trying to keep the same spec across what are rather different
operating systems at this point. You can do anything with conditionals,
of course, to the point if just having two completely different specs
crammed into one file. I don't see how that's any more maintainable
than just having separate, but everyone likes their own thing.
packaging mailing list -- packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org