[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       opensuse-packaging
Subject:    [opensuse-packaging] Re: Python packages naming rules
From:       Todd Rme <toddrme2178 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2017-08-24 16:50:16
Message-ID: CADb7s=v7iZ_Ssy0WEDHn49nr6N4J_PH_j2SjciUVgsyRhRDi6g () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 12:23 PM, jan matejek <jmatejek@suse.com> wrote:
> On 24.8.2017 18:03, Todd Rme wrote:
>>
>> I would be strongly against having "python3-foo" obsolete/provide
>> "python-foo", that would break both packages and users own scripts.
>
> I don't see how that breaks user scripts?
> Do we expect someone to rely on package names in a way that would also touch custom scripts?

They will break because their python2 dependencies will automagically
be deleted and replaced by python3 versions.

> As for breaking packages, that is true. OTOH, I will be doing a conversion run on Factory to replace
> all "python-foo" with a versioned require anyway.
> (I intend to first replace with "python3-foo", see what breaks, then revert to "python2-foo" where
> python3 is not supported)
>
> I admit that i'm biased towards breaking things ;) Mainly for the sake of discovering *what exactly*
> breaks and if we actually need to have it.
>
> OTOH, maybe some rpmlint and submission checks are sufficient for this purpose and we can keep old
> packages untouched.

A lot of packages are unsupported upstream. They will never support
python3, and having to go through and modernize all those packages
seems like a huge amount of work for little or no real benefit to
anyone. I would rather just let them bitrot until they break and
remove them then.
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]