Two fyi's relating to the names. (1) pulpproj is our twitter handle. Both pulp and pulpproject were already taken. (2) I agree that pulp3 could be a headache down the road regardless of if the 3 is for Pulp3 or Python3.
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Jeremy Audet <jau...@redhat.com> wrote: > Beware that using a name of "pulp3" can cause packaging issues. Consider > this scenario: > > 1. The (non-Red Hat) pulp application jumps from version 3 to 4. > 2. Downstream packagers upgrade their (non-Red Hat) "pulp" package > from version 3 to 4. > 3. Downstream packagers create a "pulp3" package that provides version > 3 of the (non-Red Hat) pulp application. > > This scenario I just outlined isn't weird or unusual. For example, on my > system, I can install the following packages: > > - python (Python 3.6.0) > - python35 (Python 3.5.3) > - python34 (Python 3.4.6) > - python33 (Python 3.3.6) > - python32 (Python 3.2.6) > - python30 (Python 3.0.1) > - python2 (Python 2.7.13) > > How weird would it be if someone started distributing ann unrelated > "python4" package? > > By distributing the (Red Hat) pulp application under the name pulp3, we > make life harder for downstream package maintainers. > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > Pulp-dev@redhat.com > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
