On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:43:07PM -0500, Yichao Yu wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:48 PM, 小龙 陈 <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Allen, > > > > I think the convention is to make two packages for software that > > support both Python 2 and 3. For example, in the extra repo, there's > > > > python-cairo and python2-cairo > > python-cchardet and python2-cchardet > > python-memcached and python2-memcached > > etc. > > Well, both of them are python libraries, which cannot support both > python2 and python3 in the same binary package (OK, you can, by > including both python2 and python3 modules but that's not the > point....) > > According to a previous email on the same list[1], you probably still > need to create two packages for pyton2 and python3 if you want to > support both of them (and probably rename the binary to avoid > conflict.) > > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg19241.html
Well, the problem is flake8 is a python app, not a library. Maybe I'm worrying about nothing, but should the python-*, python2-* naming convention also be used in this case?
