On September 3, 2018 9:25:08 AM GMT+02:00, Felixoid via aur-requests <[email protected]> wrote: >Nevertheless, Yen, polysh package contains not an only script by itself >but >modules in /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/, see [1]. Regarding this, >I >couldn't say, that polysh doesn't provide modules. Moreover, when two >months ago python was upgraded from 3.6 to 3.7, the package was broken >without any hints. That's why I've thought that it's a good idea to add >the >prefix. IMHO, it doesn't contradict with [2]. > >I could only agree If you are 100% sure that the package must stay as >is. >But as I see, it contains prerequisites to be named as 'python-polysh'. >
It contains modules because it's not all spit into a single file but properly split, which doesn't mean it must be a programmable API. It's a prompt/cli tool to multiplex connections. It broke because it was built with python 3.6 hence containing the required files there. For unsupported AUR packages one must handle and rebuild themselves. I agree here that it should be called polysh without python prefix. Cheers Levente
