Le 2012-11-28 01:53, Allen Li a écrit :
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:43:07PM -0500, Yichao Yu wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:48 PM, 小龙 陈 <chillermillerl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Allen,
I think the convention is to make two packages for software that
support both Python 2 and 3. For example, in the extra repo, there's
python-cairo and python2-cairo
python-cchardet and python2-cchardet
python-memcached and python2-memcached
etc.
Well, both of them are python libraries, which cannot support both
python2 and python3 in the same binary package (OK, you can, by
including both python2 and python3 modules but that's not the
point....)
According to a previous email on the same list[1], you probably still
need to create two packages for pyton2 and python3 if you want to
support both of them (and probably rename the binary to avoid
conflict.)
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/aur-general@archlinux.org/msg19241.html
Well, the problem is flake8 is a python app, not a library. Maybe I'm
worrying about nothing, but should the python-*, python2-* naming
convention also be used in this case?
If it is an application and does not provide a module that could be
included in another application, then I suggest to depend on python3
only and keep the name "flake8".
Stéphane
