On 6/14/21 6:07 PM, Neal Gompa wrote:
That only worked because public was default, not private. That's not how it works for Fedora packages at all.
You're much more experienced in this area than I am, so I'm inclined to think that you're right and I'm missing something. The guidelines do make sense to me though, as a packager, because if a package in Fedora provides python3dist(samba), then I infer that other packages record a dependency on a python package named "samba". And as long as those packages are *only* built as RPMs and installed in Fedora, everything is fine. But if one of those packages is also published on PyPI, and records a dependency on "samba", then anyone who installs that package through "pip" is going to pull in a bad dependency, and we should be trying to avoid that situation, typically by either publishing packages in PyPI or at least reserving the names.
It's unfortunate that there is a "samba" module on PyPI. I don't know if we could negotiate with its owner to transfer that name. The "homepage" links to an absent github project, and the module does not appear to be actively developed.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
