Agreed. +0 to pulpproj for me.
David On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Jeremy Audet <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2) pulp3 > > - is ambiguous regardless of if the 3 is for Pulp3 or Python3. > > Yes. Also, using "pulp3" makes it easy for a naming conflict to occur with > the existing PuLP <https://pypi.python.org/pypi/PuLP> package. What > happens when their project also gets to version 3? Or when their project > gets to version 4, and downstream packagers want to have a separate package > for versions 4 and 3 of PuLP? One could say that this won't be an issue on > account of the differing capitalization of the projects' names. But I don't > think that capitalization is a good differentiator, as demonstrated by the > NetworkManager project. > > And less importantly, using "pulp3" will force us to switch to "pulp4," > "pulp5," etc as new major versions of Pulp come out. > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
