1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.MAINT.PYTHON

  • Re: Need help with naming scheme in debian/control for python library

    From Carsten Schoenert@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jul 1 10:50:01 2025
    Hello Aryan,

    Am 01.07.25 um 09:59 schrieb Aryan Karamtoth:
    ...
    So my question is should I rename the source field to “python3- packagename” too or will it cause any conflicts?

    the common sense is to prefix the source package with "python" without
    any version numbers.

    And the bin package for a library with "python3" to mark the Paython
    main version the package is usable with.

    Contrary bin packages which contain documentation only then get the
    prefix "python" again, but also a suffix "doc".

    e.g.

    Source: python-upstream_name
    ...

    Package: python3-upstream_name
    Description: Shiny neat Python library to do $things
    ...

    Package: python-upstream_name-doc
    Description: Shiny neat Python library to do $things (Documentation)
    ...

    https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?email=team%2Bpython%40tracker.debian.org

    There you have a full overview of existing packages maintained by the DPT.
    Have a look at existing packages.


    --
    Regards
    Carsten

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andrey Rakhmatullin@21:1/5 to Aryan Karamtoth on Tue Jul 1 11:40:01 2025
    On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 09:02:24AM +0000, Aryan Karamtoth wrote:
    I read somewhere in some documentation given by Debian Python Team and they said that “python-packagename” stands for a library in Python 2 and “python3-packagename” must be the convention for python 3 librarie.

    That's about binary packages, not about the source packages.

    Also, please don't top-post.

    --
    WBR, wRAR

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

    iQJhBAABCgBLFiEEolIP6gqGcKZh3YxVM2L3AxpJkuEFAmhjrFMtFIAAAAAAFQAP cGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3Jnd3JhckBkZWJpYW4ub3JnAAoJEDNi9wMaSZLh VUwP/1p21N9+GyK/O+3AwaeuvHeuRumiPfmvKn3xhByYxKZ3ALenVbHMsClRMJQv sxLj0px5IwWq7gUR7TJzSpcx7fLQnP2PeSFS8ChI+Q2oQ2/gkH7chq16FDTM2+Q5 upmszaIGlgdgW/0axA18jdoDzdjbEej05bUmbrSbPzZsva6SmcUQNra1UFxs6s/I fWGCu5sY+Erd8fQSNjzaAJ6N3aHYzmQPaYxt74wFPWBLmJmtp/95QrQSB5gliB+2 uVkCjmLV3ou8mIPC/ZAtVkSpFW26nNkOSDPGOfqNRJWKFSqTvvshZZB5KCAbBjRp A787zib+Zedz+IFXlpqIPcbFH2UY5DyDcB6fkCal3QKZkpZ6bYWNZLocVUeZJSmW jOKZNdFAwq3W8uwU58nP10RoeW2qwP+SjIWMYGmymEVM3AW+7IQklFhUwqO15BuT TUokXSMSTADSKH58QyG6XIuyv/Fg6QJJJnnlWI6tnvODbXvQh36VR25t5K7gH/zS XER1HfgrE+YsLBSVnQFVaCXEz76FyH+truwZNU+NYbcILi8mB56lM/UOGc8hE6Pc eeiEaQptPVcDIok53mn9z85YKjqil7r9JHW/lyJSqE0yFxBr5+evVuIsA66Mbh0H RuK6BRiPAjSgiY/LL+Z+beX4aJwbwSGoXdHADk33FMm2MaJq
    =QlF7
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Simon McVittie@21:1/5 to Carsten Schoenert on Tue Jul 1 18:00:01 2025
    On Tue, 01 Jul 2025 at 10:42:19 +0200, Carsten Schoenert wrote:
    Am 01.07.25 um 09:59 schrieb Aryan Karamtoth:
    ...
    So my question is should I rename the source field to “python3- >>packagename” too or will it cause any conflicts?

    The source package ("Source:") should not be prefixed with "python3-",
    even if the binary package ("Package:") is. This is because, if there is
    a Python 4 in future, we might want to build both python3-foo and
    python4-foo binary packages from the same source package, which would
    normally be called python-foo.

    If the source package name ("Source:") needs a disambiguating prefix,
    use "python-" instead of "python3-" for that.

    the common sense is to prefix the source package with "python" without
    any version numbers.

    Usually, yes. If the upstream name of the software is something that
    could easily collide with similarly-named packages outside the Python
    ecosystem (like for example "keyring",
    https://github.com/jaraco/keyring) then prefix it with "python-" (which
    is what has been done in https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/python-keyring/-/blob/debian/master/debian/control?ref_type=heads).

    But if the upstream name of the software already makes it obvious that
    it's for Python (like for example dbus-python, tap.py or pygobject) then
    there isn't necessarily any need to prefix "python-" to that as well.

    If you are not sure, the safe choice is to prefix "python-".

    Aryan, you would probably get clearer advice if you name the specific
    package you are working on, rather than saying "packagename".

    There is some discussion of this naming convention in https://bugs.debian.org/791635, and I think it would make sense for the
    Python policy to say something about this (although I don't agree with
    the suggestion to require a python- prefix on *every* source package
    name for Python libraries, because something like python-dbus-python
    would be silly).

    Have a look at existing packages.

    Yes, this. There are lots of good examples.

    smcv

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)