[opensuse-packaging] Python modules and libraries
Hello, first of all, happy new year. Now, to the matter at hand, I have a couple of python bindings for multimedia libraries and I feel like they should live in the same devel project as said libraries. Project maintainers aren't always in agreement with me, so I'll ask here: if a python module is completely useless by itself, is it proper submitting it to d:l:py ? Regards -- Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On 01/01/2018 22:47, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Hello, first of all, happy new year.
Now, to the matter at hand, I have a couple of python bindings for multimedia libraries and I feel like they should live in the same devel project as said libraries. Project maintainers aren't always in agreement with me, so I'll ask here: if a python module is completely useless by itself, is it proper submitting it to d:l:py ?
Regards
-- Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html
I see four python packages in multimedia:libs one is a link to it's main package and the other three are also bindings for other multimedia:libs packages. The should stay. Dave Plater -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Dave Plater lst wrote
On 01/01/2018 22:47, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Now, to the matter at hand, I have a couple of python bindings for multimedia libraries and I feel like they should live in the same devel project as said libraries. Project maintainers aren't always in agreement with me, so I'll ask here: if a python module is completely useless by itself, is it proper submitting it to d:l:py ?
I see four python packages in multimedia:libs one is a link to it's main package and the other three are also bindings for other multimedia:libs packages. The should stay.
So, python-python-vlc and python-python-mpv are there already, but python-python-mpd2 was rejected. Should I send the latter to d:l:py instead? Regards -- Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Hello, first of all, happy new year.
Now, to the matter at hand, I have a couple of python bindings for multimedia libraries and I feel like they should live in the same devel project as said libraries. Project maintainers aren't always in agreement with me, so I'll ask here: if a python module is completely useless by itself, is it proper submitting it to d:l:py ?
Regards I assume that you are talking about sr#560776 [1] - having python-
On Mon, 2018-01-01 at 13:47 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote: python-mpv in mm:apps does not make it correct lication - as python library it belongs either to d:l:p or mm:libs. python-python-mpd2 does not seem tu be multimedia relate application at all. Cheers Martin 1. https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/560776
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Mon, 2018-01-01 at 13:47 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Hello, first of all, happy new year.
Now, to the matter at hand, I have a couple of python bindings for multimedia libraries and I feel like they should live in the same devel project as said libraries. Project maintainers aren't always in agreement with me, so I'll ask here: if a python module is completely useless by itself, is it proper submitting it to d:l:py ?
I assume that you are talking about sr#560776 [1] - having python- python-mpv in mm:apps does not make it correct lication - as python library it belongs either to d:l:p or mm:libs. python-python-mpd2 does not seem tu be multimedia relate application at all.
Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official position on the matter? Regards -- Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official position on the matter? Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of mm:app? Five?
Regards M
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official position on the matter? Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of mm:app? Five?
Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer catches the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy. Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be moved to d:l:py. Regards -- Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official position on the matter?
Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of mm:app? Five?
Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer catches the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy. Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be moved to d:l:py.
It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be someone whom would think it is still fitting and some would consider it otherwise. I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just library I would say it should not really land there, unless it is a linkpac for something else built from the same source... Cheers Tom
Tomas Chvatal wrote
Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official position on the matter?
Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of mm:app? Five?
Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer catches the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy. Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be moved to d:l:py.
It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be someone whom would think it is still fitting and some would consider it otherwise.
I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just library I would say it should not really land there, unless it is a linkpac for something else built from the same source...
To be precise, unofficial (or official but separate) python bindings for a multimedia library. Should they go to d:l:py and be linked perhaps? Regards -- Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 03:19 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Tomas Chvatal wrote
Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official position on the matter?
Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of mm:app? Five?
Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer catches the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy. Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be moved to d:l:py.
It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be someone whom would think it is still fitting and some would consider it otherwise.
I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just library I would say it should not really land there, unless it is a linkpac for something else built from the same source...
To be precise, unofficial (or official but separate) python bindings for a multimedia library.
Should they go to d:l:py and be linked perhaps?
Why would they need to be linked - is something else depending on such python bindings library?
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 03:19 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Tomas Chvatal wrote
Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official position on the matter?
Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of mm:app? Five?
Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer catches the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy. Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be moved to d:l:py.
It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be someone whom would think it is still fitting and some would consider it otherwise.
I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just library I would say it should not really land there, unless it is a linkpac for something else built from the same source...
To be precise, unofficial (or official but separate) python bindings for a multimedia library.
Should they go to d:l:py and be linked perhaps?
Why would they need to be linked - is something else depending on such python bindings library?
I'll have to check, but in the case of python-python-vlc a separate package has a runtime dependency on it. Ceteris paribus, do you recommend them to be moved? Regards -- Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 03:19 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
Tomas Chvatal wrote
Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote: > Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an > official > position on the matter?
Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of mm:app? Five?
Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer catches the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy. Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be moved to d:l:py.
It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be someone whom would think it is still fitting and some would consider it otherwise.
I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just library I would say it should not really land there, unless it is a linkpac for something else built from the same source...
To be precise, unofficial (or official but separate) python bindings for a multimedia library.
Should they go to d:l:py and be linked perhaps?
Why would they need to be linked - is something else depending on such python bindings library?
I'll have to check, but in the case of python-python-vlc a separate package has a runtime dependency on it. If so, link would be suitable (with building disabled for factory)
Ceteris paribus, do you recommend them to be moved?
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 04:39 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote: puthon-python-vlc seem to be already readied for submission to d:l:p https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:alarrosa:branches:devel:la nguages:python/python-python-vlc M
participants (4)
-
Dave Plater -
Luigi Baldoni -
martin＠pluskal.org -
Tomas Chvatal