Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #16401

python-pyinstaller: package naming questions

Path	csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From	Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org>
Newsgroups	linux.debian.maint.python
Subject	python-pyinstaller: package naming questions
Date	Fri, 25 Oct 2024 22:10:01 +0200
Message-ID	<JByNb-4c5C-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
X-Original-To	Debian Python <debian-python@lists.debian.org>
X-Mailbox-Line	From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Fri Oct 25 20:08:16 2024
Old-Return-Path	<soren@debian.org>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status	No, score=-112.93 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.421, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, PGPSIGNATURE=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, USER_IN_DKIM_WELCOMELIST=-0.01, USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Organization	Debian
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1746358.jWzikIHUBJ"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Debian-User	soren
X-Mailing-List	<debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/22468
List-ID	<debian-python.lists.debian.org>
List-URL	<https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/>
List-Archive	https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/1974535.2LLsDtfzef@soren-desktop
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	122
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Date	Fri, 25 Oct 2024 13:07:53 -0700
X-Original-Message-ID	<1974535.2LLsDtfzef@soren-desktop>
Xref	csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:16401

Show key headers only | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

I am in the process of packaging python-pyinstaller.

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1084906

Currently my source package is named python-pyinstaller.  It produces two binary 
packages:

pyinstaller - installs executables to /usr/bin
python3-pyinstaller - installs Python modules to /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages

I have been following the discussion about package names and have started to wonder if 
pyinstaller wouldn’t be a better source package name.  That is what it is called upstream, 
and the “py” prefix already indicates it is related to Python.

Beyond that, I was wondering if it wouldn’t be better to only provide one binary file.  I don’t 
know if there is any value to the Python modules without the executables in /usr/bin.  Is 
there any policy or best practice that says this should be split into two binary packages?

Soren

P.S.  I figured I would ask now as it is easy to make changes before the first upload.

-- 
Soren Stoutner
soren@debian.org

Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

python-pyinstaller:  package naming questions Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2024-10-25 22:10 +0200
  Re: python-pyinstaller:  package naming questions Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> - 2024-10-31 22:30 +0100

csiph-web