Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

The meeting is scheduled for Tomorrow. Find the details below, everyone is welcome to join. When: Thursday May 11 at 2.30pm UTC Where: https://bluejeans.com/436590399 Interact: https://etherpad.net/p/pypi_naming Regards, Ina Panova Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. "Do not go wh

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

I am going to schedule a meeting so we can have a live vital beneficial discussion. Thank you all for participation and feedback, we will try to find a consensus during ^^, or at least next steps. Regards, Ina Panova Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. "Do not go where the path may

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

As an alternate suggestion: libpulp? No existing naming conflicts with other projects that I can see on Github (no results) or Google (all top search results are for pulp project related pages containing "/var/lib/pulp"). Regards, Ben Roberts This email and any files transmitted with it contain

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

Hate to be the trouble maker but (for all the reasons I've already given) I think having any form of 'project' in the name of an application or python package makes no sense at all. I've racked my brain but have not come up with a better name. I vote we continue brainstorming rather than get th

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

So looks like based on previous input, the results are: 1) PyPI name is ---> pulpproj 2) The answer to the question: Will all packages install under a top level directory or not? YES and it will look like: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/2444#Will-all-packages-install-under-a-top-level-directory-or

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

Since "app" is a specific concept within Pulp (both a celery app and one or more django apps), it could be awkward for the entire python namespace to include the word "app". "import pulpapp.app" feels odd. I would stick with something that does not overlap with the name of any existing component or

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

+1 pulpapp +0 pulpproj On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 4:54 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > +1 pulpproj > -0 pulpproject > -0 pulp_platform > -1 plp > -1 pulp3 > > Also I'm +1 to having the top level namespace (the name above) contain the > subnamespaces i.e. 'platform', 'common', 'streamer', and 'cli'. So t

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

+1 pulpproj -0 pulpproject -0 pulp_platform -1 plp -1 pulp3 Also I'm +1 to having the top level namespace (the name above) contain the subnamespaces i.e. 'platform', 'common', 'streamer', and 'cli'. So that would be a 'yes' to [0]. [0]: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/2444#Will-all-packages-install-

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

Agreed. +0 to pulpproj for me. David On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Jeremy Audet 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

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

> 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 package. What happens when their project also gets to version 3? Or when their project ge

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

My vote will be +0 for pulpproj to imitate pulpproject.org. Since the only perfect option is "pulp" I doubt that we will come up with anything that is great. That's ok though because this name shouldn't affect very much. +1 to pushing this through, thanks Ina! On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Ina

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

Team, we need to make some progress on this and try to find a common agreement. Based on the email thread, i will summarize the options which where proposed. I will highlight mainly the concerns brought up by people( where there have been expressed any). I would like to hear more feedback *here in

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

+1 pulpapp +0 pulpproj On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 7:05 AM, Ina Panova wrote: > we have not considered yet 'pulpapp' > > pip install pulpapp > pip install pulpapp_cli > pip install pulpapp_streamer > > > > > Regards, > > Ina Panova > Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. > > "Do not go wher

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

we have not considered yet 'pulpapp' pip install pulpapp pip install pulpapp_cli pip install pulpapp_streamer Regards, Ina Panova Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. "Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

I went through all the thread and I personally do not like any of options. -1 pulp3 +0 pulpproj -0 pulp_platform -1 plp I somehow agree what Jeff pointed out but looks like pulpproj given the current situation is the 'winner'. I do not know what to do about this, but maybe email our community a

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

+1 to pulpproj On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Sean Myers wrote: > On 04/19/2017 12:02 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > > Two fyi's relating to the names. (1) pulpproj is our twitter handle. Both > > pulp and pulpproject were already taken. (2) I agree that pulp3 could be > a > > headache down the

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

On 04/19/2017 12:02 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > Two fyi's relating to the names. (1) pulpproj is our twitter handle. Both > pulp and pulpproject were already taken. (2) I agree that pulp3 could be a > headache down the road regardless of if the 3 is for Pulp3 or Python3. Yeah, I was only kidding a

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

Two fyi's relating to the names. (1) pulpproj is our twitter handle. Both pulp and pulpproject were already taken. (2) I agree that pulp3 could be a headache down the road regardless of if the 3 is for Pulp3 or Python3. On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Jeremy Audet wrote: > Beware that using a

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

Beware that using a name of "pulp3" can cause packaging issues. Consider this scenario: 1. The (non-Red Hat) pulp application jumps from version 3 to 4. 2. Downstream packagers upgrade their (non-Red Hat) "pulp" package from version 3 to 4. 3. Downstream packagers create a "pulp3" pack

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

+0 pulp3 +1 pulpproj -0 pulpproject -0 pulp_platform -1 plp We also need to answer the related question [0] about how the packages are going to be laid out. I'm +1 to having the top level namespace (the name above) contain the subnamespaces i.e. 'platform', 'common', 'streamer', and 'cli'. [0]: h

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Austin Macdonald wrote: > It feels like we are approaching a consensus around `pulp3`. I would like > to take an informal poll using the voting syntax from PUP-1. [0] The other > questions need to be hashed out a little more. > > +0 pulp3 -0 pulpproject +0 pulp

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

It feels like we are approaching a consensus around `pulp3`. I would like to take an informal poll using the voting syntax from PUP-1. [0] The other questions need to be hashed out a little more. +1 pulp3 +0 pulpproject -0 pulpproj -0 pulp_platform -1 plp [0]: https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/m

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

I'm not a fan of plp, it does look too much like pip IMO On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Austin Macdonald wrote: > Another alternative: plp > > Pros: > - super short! > - pinky typing exercise > > Cons: > - Fonts are silly: plp (PLP) looks like pIp (PIP) > - sounds "web 2.0" > > > On Wed, A

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

Another alternative: plp Pros: - super short! - pinky typing exercise Cons: - Fonts are silly: plp (PLP) looks like pIp (PIP) - sounds "web 2.0" On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Sean Myers wrote: > On 04/12/2017 10:48 AM, Austin Macdonald wrote: > > I like pulp3 better, but it has some w

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

On 04/12/2017 10:48 AM, Austin Macdonald wrote: > I like pulp3 better, but it has some weirdness. I'm stating the obvious, > but we wouldn't be able to keep the name for pulp 4. When we put our major > versions on PyPI, they will all be treated as completely separate projects. > I don't see a big p

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

I like pulp3 better, but it has some weirdness. I'm stating the obvious, but we wouldn't be able to keep the name for pulp 4. When we put our major versions on PyPI, they will all be treated as completely separate projects. I don't see a big problem there, but it is unusual. On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 a

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

I'm very opposed to having any form of the word "project" as part of the name. It's like having Firefox be named "firefoxproj". Just as the Mozilla project and the Firefox application are completely different things, so are the Pulp project and the Pulp application. -1 for pulpproj -1 for pulp

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

I would prefer pulp3 over pulpproj, nice idea Bihan! On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 1:47 AM, Dennis Kliban wrote: > I like using the pulp3 namespace. > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Bihan Zhang wrote: > >> What about pulp3 as a potential namespace? With this naming we can >> communicate that this

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

I like using the pulp3 namespace. On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Bihan Zhang wrote: > What about pulp3 as a potential namespace? With this naming we can > communicate that this PyPI package is Pulp3 (not Pulp2), and that it is > Python3 compatible. > > There's plenty of PyPI packages that util

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

What about pulp3 as a potential namespace? With this naming we can communicate that this PyPI package is Pulp3 (not Pulp2), and that it is Python3 compatible. There's plenty of PyPI packages that utilizes the package3 naming strategy to show python3 compatibility. And since PuLP (the other pulp) i

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

After spending the majority of the day hunting down the fine details of this plan, I'm in agreement with Michael that it isn't the best option here. While it seemed interesting on the surface, the devil is in the details, as they say. And this just appears to be a little too non-standard for u

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

"pulpproj" has grown on me. For a while I was fond of something like "pulp_app", thinking as both a django app and celery app. Then we'd have "pulp_streamer", "pulp_common", and "pulp_cli" all as top-level namespaces. I still think this would be a fine approach, but I lean in favor of keeping our

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

The "datadir" idea is a good option to have, and I can see how it could work. That said, it has a couple of drawbacks worth considering. 1) I regularly think about the Principle of Least Surprise, and it applies well here. Python devs know that python code usually goes in site-packages. Not findin

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

+1 for the pcreech {datadir} plan. If we go with the pcreech plan, I am -0 on using `pulpproj` for our PyPI name. If we are not using the PyPI name at import time, then the length problem [0] no longer exists, and we are abbreviating without a good reason. I think "pulpproject" would be best, sinc

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

After considering @pcreech's point, +1 installing Pulp in {datadir} and having it install there using setup.cfg options. In terms of setting the PYTHONPATH at runtime, it would be best if we could have the Python code do it itself at startup. As an alternative we could do it with the systemd units,

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

I've been doing some preliminary research into a 'Have our cake and eat it too' option. While getting back up to speed on things pulp, I came across this comment on the FPC ticket: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/671#comment-146777 Buried towards the end of this comment, in the

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

On 04/07/2017 03:15 PM, Dennis Kliban wrote: > This should definitely be a PUP. I like the pulpproj prefix. +1 pulpproj, I like the brevity and clear relationship to pulpproject.org. Also +1 to deciding this in PUP form. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

I agree with Austin, I think pulp_platform is preferable to pulpproj. On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Austin Macdonald wrote: > I think that we can actually go with pulp_platform. PyPI will normalize > this to pulp-platform. > > Basically, it boils down to this sentence from PEP 426: > > "All co

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

I think that we can actually go with pulp_platform. PyPI will normalize this to pulp-platform. Basically, it boils down to this sentence from PEP 426: "All comparisons of distribution names MUST be case insensitive, and MUST consider hyphens and underscores to be equivalent." This is a confusing

Re: [Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

This should definitely be a PUP. I like the pulpproj prefix. On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > Pulp3 can't use the 'pulp' Python namespace like we did on Pulp2 because > it's already taken on PyPI and we don't want to conflict. We need to decide > on some new Python packa

[Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

Pulp3 can't use the 'pulp' Python namespace like we did on Pulp2 because it's already taken on PyPI and we don't want to conflict. We need to decide on some new Python package names. I've updated a previous write-up[0] with options we have in this area. It talks about package name options for pip