Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #16432
| Path | csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod |
|---|---|
| From | Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> |
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.maint.python |
| Subject | Re: python-pyinstaller: package naming questions |
| Date | Thu, 31 Oct 2024 22:30:01 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <JDKTT-5Klh-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <JByNb-4c5C-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| X-Mailbox-Line | From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Thu Oct 31 21:27:06 2024 |
| Old-Return-Path | <soren@debian.org> |
| X-Amavis-Spam-Status | No, score=-114.93 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, 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="nextPart432606945.ZL440uy7bS"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" |
| X-Debian-User | soren |
| X-Mailing-List | <debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/22502 |
| List-ID | <debian-python.lists.debian.org> |
| List-URL | <https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/> |
| List-Archive | https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/27471270.ZFbi4UoJAX@soren-desktop |
| Approved | robomod@news.nic.it |
| Lines | 80 |
| Sender | robomod@news.nic.it |
| X-Original-Date | Thu, 31 Oct 2024 14:26:40 -0700 |
| X-Original-Message-ID | <27471270.ZFbi4UoJAX@soren-desktop> |
| X-Original-References | <1974535.2LLsDtfzef@soren-desktop> |
| Xref | csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:16432 |
Show key headers only | View raw
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
I didn’t receive any responses to the below email, so I decided to go with pyinstaller as the source package name, but to still use two binary packages: pyinstaller and python3-pyinstaller. On Friday, October 25, 2024 1:07:53 PM MST Soren Stoutner wrote: > 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 — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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