Hi,
I need to package vkbasalt-cli [1] as a dependency for Bottles. Bottles will use the Python library, but vkbasalt-cli also provides a command for independent/direct usage.
My plan is to name the Fedora package 'vkbasalt-cli' in line with upstream and add a virtual provide for 'python3-vkbasalt-cli'.
Could someone confirm that this is the right approach for vkbasalt-cli?
Thanks in advance,
On 21-04-2023 12:46, Sandro wrote:
I need to package vkbasalt-cli [1] as a dependency for Bottles. Bottles will use the Python library, but vkbasalt-cli also provides a command for independent/direct usage.
And here is the missing link:
Hi!
On 21. 04. 23 12:46, Sandro wrote:
Hi,
I need to package vkbasalt-cli [1] as a dependency for Bottles. Bottles will use the Python library, but vkbasalt-cli also provides a command for independent/direct usage.
My plan is to name the Fedora package 'vkbasalt-cli' in line with upstream and add a virtual provide for 'python3-vkbasalt-cli'.
Could someone confirm that this is the right approach for vkbasalt-cli?
Thanks in advance,
That sounds good. You could also do it the other way around.
In this case, it looks like `vkbasalt-cli` is developed independently of vkbasalt itself, is that right? If there's a chance that an “official” vkbasalt CLI appears in the future, consider using only `python-vkbasalt-cli`, to prevent future confusion. But I guess if that ever happened, the fact that vkbasalt-cli provides `/usr/bin/vkbasalt` would be a bigger issue.
On 27-04-2023 10:48, Petr Viktorin wrote:
That sounds good. You could also do it the other way around.
I think that depends on the main purpose of the package. Is it primarily an app or primarily a library. In this case it seems the utility is prevalent.
Albeit, I don't mind naming it python-vkbasalt-cli and providing a python3-vkbasalt-cli subpackage and a provides vkbasalt = ...
I did the same for python-fvs, which looks to be primarily a library with an added utility [1]
In this case, it looks like `vkbasalt-cli` is developed independently of vkbasalt itself, is that right? If there's a chance that an “official” vkbasalt CLI appears in the future, consider using only `python-vkbasalt-cli`, to prevent future confusion. But I guess if that ever happened, the fact that vkbasalt-cli provides `/usr/bin/vkbasalt` would be a bigger issue.
Well, I submitted the package for review [2] and have been told that vkbasalt not being published on PyPI is an issue wrt naming parity. So, I filed a bug requesting publication on PyPI [3], but I haven't heard back from upstream, yet. If upstream remains unresponsive, I would need to either publish it myself or get the name reserved as described in PyPI parity [4].
AFAICT, the package is developed independently of vkbasalt and specifically for Bottles.
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2187061 [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2188653 [3] https://gitlab.com/TheEvilSkeleton/vkbasalt-cli/-/issues/10 [4] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_pypi_pari...
-- Sandro
On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 1:27 PM Sandro lists@penguinpee.nl wrote:
On 27-04-2023 10:48, Petr Viktorin wrote:
That sounds good. You could also do it the other way around.
I think that depends on the main purpose of the package. Is it primarily an app or primarily a library. In this case it seems the utility is prevalent.
Albeit, I don't mind naming it python-vkbasalt-cli and providing a python3-vkbasalt-cli subpackage and a provides vkbasalt = ...
I did the same for python-fvs, which looks to be primarily a library with an added utility [1]
I had the same question when packaging up git-revise (a Python-based program that is a git extension, so it is an executable script), and the advice I received was if the package is on PyPi, then it is probably best to use a python-* name to make it discoverable ( https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproje...). I decided to name the source RPM python-git-revise (instead of just git-revise), and then included a subpackage with the shortname so that it was still searchable/installable easily.
-Ian
In this case, it looks like `vkbasalt-cli` is developed independently of vkbasalt itself, is that right? If there's a chance that an “official” vkbasalt CLI appears in the future, consider using only `python-vkbasalt-cli`, to prevent future confusion. But I guess if that ever happened, the fact that vkbasalt-cli provides `/usr/bin/vkbasalt` would be a bigger issue.
Well, I submitted the package for review [2] and have been told that vkbasalt not being published on PyPI is an issue wrt naming parity. So, I filed a bug requesting publication on PyPI [3], but I haven't heard back from upstream, yet. If upstream remains unresponsive, I would need to either publish it myself or get the name reserved as described in PyPI parity [4].
AFAICT, the package is developed independently of vkbasalt and specifically for Bottles.
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2187061 [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2188653 [3] https://gitlab.com/TheEvilSkeleton/vkbasalt-cli/-/issues/10 [4]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_pypi_pari...
-- Sandro _______________________________________________ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-leave@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.fedoraproje... Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
On 27-04-2023 15:03, Ian McInerney wrote:
Albeit, I don't mind naming it python-vkbasalt-cli and providing a python3-vkbasalt-cli subpackage and a provides vkbasalt = ...
I did the same for python-fvs, which looks to be primarily a library with an added utility [1]
I had the same question when packaging up git-revise (a Python-based program that is a git extension, so it is an executable script), and the advice I received was if the package is on PyPi, then it is probably best to use a python-* name to make it discoverable ( https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproje...). I decided to name the source RPM python-git-revise (instead of just git-revise), and then included a subpackage with the shortname so that it was still searchable/installable easily.
Yes. I'm leaning towards the same approach. Only vkbasalt-cli is not on PyPI, yet.
-- Sandro
On 27-04-2023 14:26, Sandro wrote:
Well, I submitted the package for review [2] and have been told that vkbasalt not being published on PyPI is an issue wrt naming parity. So, I filed a bug requesting publication on PyPI [3], but I haven't heard back from upstream, yet. If upstream remains unresponsive, I would need to either publish it myself or get the name reserved as described in PyPI parity [4].
It has been almost two weeks and I haven't heard back from upstream regarding my request for publication on PyPI.
What are the next steps I should take in line with PyPI parity? I'm leaning towards "Ask Python SIG to block the name on PyPI for you" and will consider publishing it myself at a later stage should upstream remain unresponsive.
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2188653 [3] https://gitlab.com/TheEvilSkeleton/vkbasalt-cli/-/issues/10 [4] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_pypi_pari...
-- Sandro
On 05-05-2023 15:10, Sandro wrote:
On 27-04-2023 14:26, Sandro wrote:
Well, I submitted the package for review [2] and have been told that vkbasalt not being published on PyPI is an issue wrt naming parity. So, I filed a bug requesting publication on PyPI [3], but I haven't heard back from upstream, yet. If upstream remains unresponsive, I would need to either publish it myself or get the name reserved as described in PyPI parity [4].
It has been almost two weeks and I haven't heard back from upstream regarding my request for publication on PyPI.
Still no news from upstream. But I'd like to move on with packaging vkbasalt-cli. Meanwhile bug reports regarding Bottles keep pouring [1] in. Well, at least is shows that there's a user base for that package.
What are the next steps I should take in line with PyPI parity? I'm leaning towards "Ask Python SIG to block the name on PyPI for you" and will consider publishing it myself at a later stage should upstream remain unresponsive.
Did I misunderstand/misinterpret the guidelines? The review is currently stalled due to the PyPI parity issue.
Should I approach PyPI folks myself and ask them to block vkbasalt-cli for me? Any kind of guidance is much appreciated.
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2188653 [3] https://gitlab.com/TheEvilSkeleton/vkbasalt-cli/-/issues/10 [4] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_pypi_pari...
[1] I'm exaggerating ;-)
-- Sandro
On Tue May 16, 2023 at 13:15 +0200, Sandro wrote:
Did I misunderstand/misinterpret the guidelines? The review is currently stalled due to the PyPI parity issue.
I didn't mean to hold up the package on this. It should be fixed, but I don't consider this issue a blocker. I just didn't have time to complete a full review myself 😅, so I left a drive by comment and didn't assign it to myself or set the fedora-review? flag. I'll try to take a look later.
-- Best,
Maxwell G (@gotmax23) Pronouns: He/They
On 16. 05. 23 13:15, Sandro wrote:
On 05-05-2023 15:10, Sandro wrote:
On 27-04-2023 14:26, Sandro wrote:
Well, I submitted the package for review [2] and have been told that vkbasalt not being published on PyPI is an issue wrt naming parity. So, I filed a bug requesting publication on PyPI [3], but I haven't heard back from upstream, yet. If upstream remains unresponsive, I would need to either publish it myself or get the name reserved as described in PyPI parity [4].
It has been almost two weeks and I haven't heard back from upstream regarding my request for publication on PyPI.
Still no news from upstream. But I'd like to move on with packaging vkbasalt-cli. Meanwhile bug reports regarding Bottles keep pouring [1] in. Well, at least is shows that there's a user base for that package.
What are the next steps I should take in line with PyPI parity? I'm leaning towards "Ask Python SIG to block the name on PyPI for you" and will consider publishing it myself at a later stage should upstream remain unresponsive.
Did I misunderstand/misinterpret the guidelines? The review is currently stalled due to the PyPI parity issue.
Should I approach PyPI folks myself and ask them to block vkbasalt-cli for me? Any kind of guidance is much appreciated.
Hi! Sorry for the silence.
It seems weird to ask PyPI admins to block a project that has working code, so what I would do is upload the project on PyPI, and tell the author that I'm happy to hand it over to him. Do you want me to do it?
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2188653 [3] https://gitlab.com/TheEvilSkeleton/vkbasalt-cli/-/issues/10 [4] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_pypi_pari...
[1] I'm exaggerating ;-)
-- Sandro _______________________________________________ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-leave@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.fedoraproje... Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
On 16-05-2023 15:56, Maxwell G wrote:
On Tue May 16, 2023 at 13:15 +0200, Sandro wrote:
Did I misunderstand/misinterpret the guidelines? The review is currently stalled due to the PyPI parity issue.
I didn't mean to hold up the package on this. It should be fixed, but I don't consider this issue a blocker. I just didn't have time to complete a full review myself 😅, so I left a drive by comment and didn't assign it to myself or set the fedora-review? flag. I'll try to take a look later.
Then we may have misunderstood each other. No worries. It happens. Language barriers and all.
I'll update the bug with new links later today. I somehow decided with the pending publication on PyPI (see elsewhere in this thread) it'd be better to name the package python-vkbasalt-cli with an extra provides for vkbasalt-cli. The same approach I/we chose for python-fvs.
Thanks again for reviewing that by the way.
-- Sandro
On 16-05-2023 16:04, Petr Viktorin wrote:
Did I misunderstand/misinterpret the guidelines? The review is currently stalled due to the PyPI parity issue.
Should I approach PyPI folks myself and ask them to block vkbasalt-cli for me? Any kind of guidance is much appreciated.
Hi! Sorry for the silence.
It seems weird to ask PyPI admins to block a project that has working code, so what I would do is upload the project on PyPI, and tell the author that I'm happy to hand it over to him. Do you want me to do it?
Thanks for the offer. I think I'll be able to do that myself. I published on PyPI before.
Should the guidelines be clarified? I read the PyPI parity paragraph several times. While it feels weird reserving a name for an existing, yet unpublished package, it feels equally, if not more, weird to publish someone else's package without their explicit consent.
I'll proceed with it all the same. Without the package landing in Fedora, Bottles will be broken forever. And who likes to spill a nice drink? ;-)
-- Sandro
On 16. 05. 23 16:32, Sandro wrote:
On 16-05-2023 16:04, Petr Viktorin wrote:
Did I misunderstand/misinterpret the guidelines? The review is currently stalled due to the PyPI parity issue.
Should I approach PyPI folks myself and ask them to block vkbasalt-cli for me? Any kind of guidance is much appreciated.
Hi! Sorry for the silence.
It seems weird to ask PyPI admins to block a project that has working code, so what I would do is upload the project on PyPI, and tell the author that I'm happy to hand it over to him. Do you want me to do it?
Thanks for the offer. I think I'll be able to do that myself. I published on PyPI before.
Thank you. Happy to help if you run into a snag.
Should the guidelines be clarified? I read the PyPI parity paragraph several times. While it feels weird reserving a name for an existing, yet unpublished package, it feels equally, if not more, weird to publish someone else's package without their explicit consent.
Fedora has packages that don't make any sense on PyPI. Perhaps the best example is RPM bindings, which are built as part of RPM and don't work unless you have the corresponding version of RPM installed. That's the use case for reserving the name.
IMO, if the author doesn't publish on PyPI (yet), putting the package there is no different than putting it in Fedora without their consent. And you probably didn't think twice about that :)
I'll proceed with it all the same. Without the package landing in Fedora, Bottles will be broken forever. And who likes to spill a nice drink? ;-)
-- Sandro
python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Ian McInerney -
Maxwell G -
Petr Viktorin -
Sandro