Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #14067

Re: rstcheck: how should I package the new public module?

Path	csiph.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed9.news.xs4all.nl!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
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	Mon, 18 Apr 2022 20:30:01 +0200
Message-ID	<EdEil-9C9s-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<EdDmh-9BA2-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Original-To	debian-python@lists.debian.org
X-Mailbox-Line	From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Mon Apr 18 18:27:42 2022
Old-Return-Path	<julian@d-and-j.net>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status	No, score=-7.21 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Policyd-Weight	using cached result; rate: -4.6
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition	inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
X-Mailing-List	<debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/19891
List-ID	<debian-python.lists.debian.org>
List-URL	<https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/>
List-Archive	https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/Yl2tjdzytqmffqbP@d-and-j.net
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	31
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Date	Mon, 18 Apr 2022 19:27:25 +0100
X-Original-Message-ID	<Yl2tjdzytqmffqbP@d-and-j.net>
X-Original-References	<20220418171546.ma2uotpb453aygnt@mail.gaussglocke.de>
Xref	csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:14067

Show key headers only | View raw

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

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