Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #14066 > unrolled thread

rstcheck: how should I package the new public module?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  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

#14066 — rstcheck: how should I package the new public module?

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

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?


Cheers
Timo

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀   ╭────────────────────────────────────────────────────╮
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁   │ Timo Röhling                                       │
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀   │ 9B03 EBB9 8300 DF97 C2B1  23BF CC8C 6BDD 1403 F4CA │
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀   ╰────────────────────────────────────────────────────╯

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#14067

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

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web