
Thomas Bechtold wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:44:18AM +0200, Michael Ströder wrote:
Thomas Bechtold wrote:
On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 10:33:00AM +0200, Michael Ströder wrote:
HI!
Any reason why so many Python module packages have the misnomer python-python-* as package names? And the set of this misnomers even grow.
As mentioned in other answers, the rule is to use python-<pypi-name> as package name. And we use that rule to convert pip requirements (which refer to the pypi name and are often given from te requirements.txt file or the setup.cfg file) to rpm package names. That would be impossible when you use python-<import-name>.
Changing names of existing packages without resolving a real issue for that package breaks installation code. It boils down to avoid using distribution packages.
Can you give a concrete example where it breaks something? At least I tried to follow [1] and added the Provides/Obsoletes when I renamed a package so the dependencies should still be resolvable.
What all distro packagers most times ignore: There is a world *outside* the distribution with *lots* of configuration code or written operational manuals which all *break* with package renaming. And even I'd be eager and willing to spend the time to write version-specific configuration code openSUSE does not provide any robust way to determine the particular version. As I was told here there's not even a robust way to determine the URL for additional version-specific repos. So what's especially frustrating for me is: Some people just change a naming convention at their own discretion without discussing this in public and without even considering the impact this has for others. Up to now I used openSUSE because there's was a good way to get new upstream code into packages pretty quickly. But if I'm now forced to pip-based installation in virtualenv there's absolutely no point to use openSUSE for my projects anymore. Ciao, Michael.