pkgsrc-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Binary naming conventions for projects written in python

On 2019-02-08 13:37, Aleksej Lebedev wrote:
Hi, everyone!

Is there a convention about how to name binaries provided by a python
module package.
The module itself get installed into ${PYSITELIB} which is something like ${LOCALBASE}/lib/python${PYPKGPREFIX}/site-packages so there are no conflicts
for packages build with different values of PYTHON_VERSION_DEFAULT.

However some python modules provide binaries. For exmaple, I committed
and wip/conan recently, which provide binaries bin/distro and
bin/conan (not really
binaries, just tiny shell wrappers, but anyway).

What is the naming convention that allows to have both versions
binaries from each
of these packages? Should I follow python's scheme: conan2.7 +
conan3.6 & distro2.7 + distro3.6?

If yes, should these packages provide symlinks conan -> conan2 -> conan2.7, etc?

Or maybe there is no convention yet?

Sorry, I just noticed that there are plenty of binaries like that. However half of them follow the scheme bin-2.7 while another half - bin2.7 (i.e. no hyphen).

Which one is correct?

Aleksej Lebedev

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index