Dne 25.9.2015 v 16:15 Mathieu Bridon napsal(a):
> 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).
Come on, this is not an argument. We don't install source code for any
other language which produces some binary libraries except Python while
you cannot deny that it would be invaluable for the same purposes. I
understand you sentiment, but I rather appreciate Orion's position, let
me quote: "But that said, I'd be happy to install -pysource sub-package
in order to do it."
Vít
>
> And on Cloud, that macro would be set to have only the bytecode
> installed, so that you'd save the space.
>
>
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
