https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208904
Ari LiVigni <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #4 from Ari LiVigni <[email protected]> --- What is the reason to not follow the same naming of other Python packages like python-nose or python-unittest2? (In reply to Colin Walters from comment #3) > (In reply to Ken Dreyer from comment #2) > > Hi Colin, would you be ok with me renaming this to simply > > "jenkins-job-builder" ? I noticed dcaro's package was named this way, and I > > think it makes more sense. > > This actually leads to a question I had - right now this package includes > both a Python library *and* a binary. > > Are there any other packages that might depend on the library code? If not, > that would argue for moving the library into a private directory (e.g. > /usr/lib/jenkins-job-builder), and setting PYTHONPATH (or changing sys.path) > inside the binary script. > > I realize this approach isn't common among Python programs, but I believe > that making a shared library shouldn't be the default - only libraries which > are "stable" should be public. > > > If you indicate your approval for this change, I'll rename the bug title and > > put in the SCM admin request. > > The above all said...I'm not opposed to a rename. You'll find Python > packages whose primary interface is an executable in Fedora that go both > ways. What is the reason to not follow the same naming of other Python packages like python-nose or python-unittest2? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
