Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #14067
| From | Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.maint.python |
| Subject | Re: rstcheck: how should I package the new public module? |
| Date | 2022-04-18 20:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <EdEil-9C9s-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <EdDmh-9BA2-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 07:15:46PM +0200, Timo Röhling wrote: > Hi, > > rstcheck used to be a pure CLI application, so I packaged it as > "rstcheck" with a private module in /usr/share/rstcheck. The latest > version has added a public module interface, so "import rstcheck" > has become a thing and the module needs to be installed publicly for > that. > > My question is: should I move/rename the whole package to > python3-rstcheck (and keep rstcheck temporarily as transitional > dummy package), or should I keep /usr/bin/rstcheck in the old > package indefinitely and only move the module to python3-rstcheck? > > The latter solution feels cleaner to me, because it neatly separates > the library and the appliation, but at the cost of an almost empty > binary package, which is frowned upon by the FTP team. Any > suggestions how I should proceed? Hi Tim, We've done exactly that with spyder: spyder contains just the binary, manpage, desktop file, appdata, icon and reportbug file. This is also helpful if there is ever a Python 4.x, as then there will be four packages: rstcheck, python3-rstcheck and python4-rstcheck. This information may be of use to you. Best wishes, Julian
Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
rstcheck: how should I package the new public module? Timo Röhling <roehling@debian.org> - 2022-04-18 19:30 +0200 Re: rstcheck: how should I package the new public module? Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net> - 2022-04-18 20:30 +0200
csiph-web