On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 11:04:06AM -0400, R P Herrold wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2017, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>
> > Hello Fedora Python package maintainers!
> >
> > This is an announcement of a mass package renaming:
> > Python 2 binary packages will be renamed to python2-*.
>
> > List 1
On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 10:14:26PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > Hello Fedora Python package maintainers!
> >
> > This is an announcement of a mass package renaming:
> > Python 2 binary packages will be renamed t
Hi,
This is following up on a brief conversation I was part of in IRC
(#fedora-devel) earlier:
I've never been quite sure how to name packages written in Python when
they are just applications. Many "applications" written in Python
still install themselves using distutils or setuptools, and so in
On 08/09/2017 04:17 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 04:08:35PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 04:48:42PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 10:14:26PM +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
Hello Fedora
On 10 August 2017 at 10:49, Ben Rosser wrote:
> As a counter-proposal I would suggest that, as we currently do, we
> require the python3-prefix to be provided by the package, but
> explicitly leave it to the packager+reviewer's discretion whether or
> not the prefix must be part of the real name,
On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 07:13:21PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> >>>The Provides satisfies any dependancies on the old name, but you're
> >>>missing an Obsoletes to tell RPM the upgrade path. Trying to installing
> >>>the new python2-libvirt RPM on an existing system fails because it
> >>>clashes
