On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 10:04 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 10:10:40AM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Also, you might consider to ship the precompiled bytecode just
> > optionally, using recommends.
> >
> > On contrary, if you insist on shipping the bytecode, why you don't
> > drop
> > the .py files? I see a lot of duplication all around python
> > packages ....
>
> Wait, we can do that? Why don't we?
>
> Everything I see in online discussion is centered on, basically,
> transparency. But we wouldn't be doing it for obfuscation. The srpms
> would still be there, and for that matter we could ship the .py files
> in a subpackage.
Or maybe rpm could have a macro a bit like %{_install_langs} (which
controls what language files are installed, even though they are all in
the packages) to control what gets installed for Python stuff, even
though everything is in the packages.
On Workstation, that macro would be set so that both the byte-code and
the code would be installed (it is invaluable for learning and
debugging purposes to be able to read/edit the code).
And on Cloud, that macro would be set to have only the bytecode
installed, so that you'd save the space.
--
Mathieu
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
