On 4 Dec 2014 00:59, "Donald Stufft" <donald(a)stufft.io> wrote:
On Dec 3, 2014, at 9:51 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > - (This is not really related to the switch, but more of a general
remark)
In [4], it says that "python 3 version of the executable gains a
python3- prefix". This is IMO bad, since upstream projects tend to name the
versioned binaries "foo-3.4, foo-3" or "foo3.4, foo3". We should
accept one
of these - I'm not really certain which one of them. I tried to discuss
this several times on distutils-sig mailing list, but without reaching a
consensus. Either way, prefixing with python3- doesn't make sense to me,
because it's not similar to any upstream way and you don't find the
binaries under their names using tab completion (e.g. foo<tab> doesn't tell
you about python3-foo).
>
> Agreed.
>
> CPython & pip use the "foo3.4, foo3" convention, so that seems enough
of
a reason to use that convention by default. We may want a "unless upstream
does it differently" caveat though.
Oops, I just noticed an ambiguity in my caveat. I meant "unless the
particular upstream project being packaged does it differently".
It doesn't really matter right now but long term I think python
packaging
should just natively support commands like this. Either just as a matter
of
fact, opt in, or by allowing templated command names. Either way I think
the upstream tooling should and likely will follow python's lead for how
these are written.
Yeah. It's somewhere on the list of the umpteen gazillion things that could
still use improving ;)
Cheers,
Nick.
_______________________________________________
python-devel mailing list
python-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/python-devel