On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 5:00 AM Petr Viktorin <pviktori(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I finally got around to this mail...
On 2020-04-19 16:55, Miro Hrončok wrote:
>
> As always, this leaves us with the name problem, but I'd very much like
> to use %python_provides (note the s). The only problem I see is that it
> is likely to be mistaken for the old one, but IMHO it shouldn't really
> hurt that much.
I guess something like %py_provides would also work, and maybe fit more
nicely with the new generation of macros. Do you like full "python" prefix?
But that's bikeshedding.
I know it's a bit of bikeshedding, but I think it's weird how
inconsistent we are with using py_* vs python_*. I'd rather us just
fully switch over to using python_* prefix everywhere.
It's annoying and I'd rather be verbose and clear rather than terse
and confusing.
--
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!