+1 hyphens On 05/17/2017 01:45 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > I also am not 100% on this decision, so this is an excellent question. > > * pip naturally transforms the underscore to a hyphen which causes some folks > [0] to believe it won't work > unless hyphens are used. In my testing, it does still work with PyPI because > PyPI treats an _ and a - as the > same character when looking up names. A stack overflow post that I read (and > can't find now) suggested that > the transformation of pip is doing was done to maintain compatibility with > more Python packaging types. I > think the concern is that if pip was fetching from something other than PyPI > which doesn't provide that > mapping feature pip's translation would cause the user to require the '-e' > option which is more work. > > * The dashes seem to be a more popular convention [1] > > * We still won't have a one-for-one matching in many places even if we do use > hyphens. For example > pulp_rpm_cli would actually be providing pulp_rpm.cli. > > I'm +0 on hypens mainly on readability and the inability for us to actually > have consistency. What do you think? > > [0]: > https://pybuilder.github.io/documentation/external_plugins.html#.WRyX_zcpCV4 > [1]: https://gist.github.com/gene1wood/9472a9d0dffce1a56d6e796afc6539b8 > > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Michael Hrivnak <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Our python package names currently all have underscores. For example: > > https://github.com/pulp/pulp_rpm/blob/2.13-release/plugins/setup.py#L6 > <https://github.com/pulp/pulp_rpm/blob/2.13-release/plugins/setup.py#L6> > > Are we thinking of moving to hyphens for a particular reason? I could be > persuaded, but consistency is > certainly nice between the python package name and the python namespace. > > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Brian Bouterse <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > I got some positive IRC feedback about the names in the doc, but > nothing via e-mail. I've added the > PyPI names to be registered from the Google doc to the ticket about > registering them [0]. It needs to > be groomed. I plan to nominate it at sprint planning tomorrow. > > [0]: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/2444 > <https://pulp.plan.io/issues/2444> > > -Brian > > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Brian Bouterse <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > To make a concrete listing of what we would register, I wrote out > a list of all PyPI packages to > be registered as column A here: > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F6_eOefpHkwtxm1YXgjAypGHW826Ogt5Z3Us4elg-YY/edit?usp=sharing > > <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F6_eOefpHkwtxm1YXgjAypGHW826Ogt5Z3Us4elg-YY/edit?usp=sharing> > > I've written these out with dashes not underscores. I *think* > either would work. Is this what > others had in mind? > > > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Michael Hrivnak > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > I also imagine us getting to that point where the CLI does > not require any code specific to a > particular plugin, but I'm not sure we'll get there in 3.0. > > On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Brian Bouterse > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > +1 to all of the core stuff. Thank you for writing it up. > > For the pulp_rpm case +0 to what you had written. I had > imagined it with a slightly > different example, but I think in practice it's almost > the same. > > pip install pulp_rpm > from pulp_rpm import anything > > As an aside, I'm hoping that plugins only have to provide > a server package and that by > installing it on the server the CLI will know about the > additional command set somehow. If > so this would avoid plugin writers having to make > additional pulp_rpm_common and > pulp_rpm_cli pip packages. If we can't do that then I > would think the pip and import for a > plugin like RPM would be: > > pip install pulp_rpm > pip install pulp_rpm_common > pip install pulp_rpm_cli > > from pulp_rpm import anything > from pulp_rpm import cli > from pulp_rpm import common > > Does ^ make sense? Is that similar or different to how > others imagined it? It's slightly > different than the example given by @mrhivnak, but in > practice I don't think it is different. > > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Daniel Alley > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > +1 > > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Jeff Ortel > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > +1, This sounds good to me. > > On 05/11/2017 10:59 AM, Michael Hrivnak wrote: > > We had a brainstorm session today to > re-evaluate the previously-identified > options, and try to come up with > > some new ones. None of the > previously-identified options had enough support to > be chosen. See the thread "PyPI > > names for Pulp3" for background. > > > > To re-cap, we are focused on two related > questions: > > > > 1. What python namespace should Pulp use, since > we cannot continue to use "pulp"? > > > > 2. What PyPI package names should we use? > > > > I pitched an idea for 1 that everyone on the > call liked, which is "pulpcore". It > could alternatively be > > "pulp_core", although my pinky finger prefers > the former. The group of roughly > 10 people who participated in > > the discussion are recommending "pulpcore" for > consideration as the python > namespace to replace "pulp". Please > > add your feedback to this thread. > > > > "core" is likable because it implies a plugin > architecture. It's similar to the > word "platform" that we've > > used extensively, but shorter (which people > liked), and perhaps slightly more > descriptive (which people also > > liked). Example: > > > > from pulpcore import streamer > > > > We discussed renaming what is currently > "pulp.platform" to something more > descriptive. "platform" is a word > > that's been with us a long time, but it's worth > re-considering, especially if we > shift to a similar word such > > as "core". "pulpcore.platform" seems awkward. > > > > A proposal is "pulpcore.apps", since that code > is all directly related to the > celery app and django app. > > > > Python namespaces would include: > > > > pulpcore.apps > > pulpcore.cli > > pulpcore.common > > pulpcore.plugin > > pulpcore.streamer > > > > For python package names, they would look > something like this: > > > > pip install pulpcore > > pip install pulpcore_cli > > pip install pulpcore_streamer > > pip install pulpcore_common > > > > Plugins would continue to use their existing > namespace and package names, with > whatever variations are > > appropriate in Pulp 3. For example: > > > > import pulp_rpm.plugins > > pip install pulp_rpm_plugins > > > > Thoughts? Those of you who were part of the > discussion, please chime in with any > additional points you'd like > > to highlight. > > > > -- > > > > Michael Hrivnak > > > > Principal Software Engineer, RHCE > > > > Red Hat > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pulp-dev mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev> > > > > > -- > > Michael Hrivnak > > Principal Software Engineer, RHCE > > Red Hat > > > > > > > -- > > Michael Hrivnak > > Principal Software Engineer, RHCE > > Red Hat > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
