On Fri, Mar 18, 2022 at 4:28 PM Miro Hrončok <mhron...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 16. 03. 22 17:12, Tomáš Orsava wrote:
> > Hi Python-devel,
> > we are considering splitting the alternative Python versions from a
> > single-package format (e.g. python3.11) to multiple subpackages (e.g.
> > python3.11{,-libs,-devel,-tkinter,-test,-idle}). We do this already with the
> > main `python3` package: it requires less disk space to install and speeds up
> > download times, because you can chose which bits are important to you. For
> > example, if you decide you don't need python3-tkinter, you save yourself ~18
> > dependent packages leading to a total savings of ~20MBs, while skipping
> > python3-test saves you further ~10MBs.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > The push came from [BZ#2063227] where the reporters would welcome to have a
> > smaller python3.11 package for containers and VMs for local testing, CI
> > purposes and more.
> > This would be a larger amount of work, so our initial reaction was hesitant.
> > We'll have to change the already complicated spec file %bcond logic, and
> > adjust
> > the ecosystem to work with the new subpackages. For example tox would need
> > to
> > Recommend `python3.11-devel`, as `python3.11` would bring in only the bare
> > interpreter. And of course a thorough integration testing would be in order.
> >
> > However, we already do separate subpackages for alternative stacks in
> > Enterprise Linux (CentOS /Stream, RHEL, EPEL) and as a general rule we
> > consider
> > it good to have fewer differences between Fedora and EL. This helps to test
> > things earlier, and there are fewer surprises in user experience. So perhaps
> > the effort in doing this would be well spent.
> >
> > To cut down on the amount of work, we're considering changing only the
> > `python3.11` package (and any future newer versions) right now. If later we
> > consider it worth it, we could switch the older alternative interpreters as
> > well, or we might let them die out as they are.
> >
> > We're currently in the brainstorming stage, so you're feedback is welcome.
> >
> > [BZ#2063227] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2063227
>
> Note that I was originally against this because I though it would make things
> more complex/complicated and the "flat" Python packages are simple.
>
> However, we build the "flat" package vs. the "split" package based on a %bcond
> -- the spec is needlessly complex/complicated already and this could make it
> much simpler (so it would no longer resemble a nuclear power plant).
>
> My only remaining fear was that it will be a huge amount of work across all
> our
> interpreters, but the idea to only do it in 3.11+ for now is intriguing. (In
> fact, I'd do it in 3.10+ so when we update main python to 3.10 in Fedora 37,
> Python 3.10 remains split.)
>
> Hence, I am in favor of this idea. Let's see how much cleanup this can bring
> to
> the spec file and how much integration work would be needed (we use reverse
> weak deps in tox, so it should be painless).
>
> Thanks, Tomáš, for writing it down.
>
I'm in favor of it myself as well. I brought it up a while back on
this list last year even:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/WNNAZWWHDU7LE4EJBDKREJO5FJQ6SXRX/
So I'd love to see this happen.
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
_______________________________________________
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-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/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
