[Fedora-packaging] Inconsistencies in Python package naming

[Rex Dieter]

On 03/28/2013 07:40 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 03/28/2013 08:32 AM, Rex Dieter wrote:
>> On 03/28/2013 07:25 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>
>>> I have a related question, actually. We're splitting a package
>>> out of the main 'sssd' package so that the pure-python config API
>>> lives in a noarch package instead of the main (arch-full)
>>> package.
>>
>> If that "pure python config API" is a python module, then a
>> python- prefix is the way to go.
>>
>> Though... it may also help frame the answer if you could describe
>> the purpose of making the subpkg in the first place?
>
>
> See https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/1839
>
>
> - From my comments in the patch review thread:
>   Rel-eng was complaining that we had python modules contained in an
> arch-specific package that were being put on disk in a noarch
> location. Rel-eng made the incorrect assumption that this meant that
> the modules were actually arch-specific, which they are not;
> SSSDConfig is pure-python and safely noarch.
>
> The correct solution to this is for us to add a python-sssdconfig
> noarch subpackage and Requires: it from the 'sssd' package (for
> backwards compatibility).

I'm not sure I would agree with the original assertion or this "correct 
solution" conclusion.  At least, it's not supported by our packaging 
guidelines anywhere that I'm aware of.  (or is it?)

-- rex