Python modules and libraries

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Python modules and libraries

Luigi Baldoni
  Hello,
first of all, happy new year.

Now, to the matter at hand, I have a couple of python bindings
for multimedia libraries and I feel like they should live in the
same devel project as said libraries.
Project maintainers aren't always in agreement with me, so
I'll ask here: if a python module is completely useless by
itself, is it proper submitting it to d:l:py ?

Regards




--
Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Dave Plater lst


On 01/01/2018 22:47, Luigi Baldoni wrote:

>    Hello,
> first of all, happy new year.
>
> Now, to the matter at hand, I have a couple of python bindings
> for multimedia libraries and I feel like they should live in the
> same devel project as said libraries.
> Project maintainers aren't always in agreement with me, so
> I'll ask here: if a python module is completely useless by
> itself, is it proper submitting it to d:l:py ?
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html
>
I see four python packages in multimedia:libs one is a link to it's main
package and the other three are also bindings for other multimedia:libs
packages. The should stay.
Dave Plater
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Luigi Baldoni
Dave Plater lst wrote

> On 01/01/2018 22:47, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
>> Now, to the matter at hand, I have a couple of python bindings
>> for multimedia libraries and I feel like they should live in the
>> same devel project as said libraries.
>> Project maintainers aren't always in agreement with me, so
>> I'll ask here: if a python module is completely useless by
>> itself, is it proper submitting it to d:l:py ?
>  
> I see four python packages in multimedia:libs one is a link to it's main
> package and the other three are also bindings for other multimedia:libs
> packages. The should stay.

So, python-python-vlc and python-python-mpv are there already,
but python-python-mpd2 was rejected. Should I send the latter
to d:l:py instead?

Regards




--
Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Martin Pluskal-2
In reply to this post by Luigi Baldoni
On Mon, 2018-01-01 at 13:47 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:

>   Hello,
> first of all, happy new year.
>
> Now, to the matter at hand, I have a couple of python bindings
> for multimedia libraries and I feel like they should live in the
> same devel project as said libraries.
> Project maintainers aren't always in agreement with me, so
> I'll ask here: if a python module is completely useless by
> itself, is it proper submitting it to d:l:py ?
>
> Regards
I assume that you are talking about sr#560776 [1] - having python-
python-mpv in mm:apps does not make it correct lication - as python
library it belongs either to d:l:p or mm:libs. python-python-mpd2 does
not seem tu be multimedia relate application at all.

Cheers

Martin

1. https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/560776

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Luigi Baldoni
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote

> On Mon, 2018-01-01 at 13:47 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
>>   Hello,
>> first of all, happy new year.
>>
>> Now, to the matter at hand, I have a couple of python bindings
>> for multimedia libraries and I feel like they should live in the
>> same devel project as said libraries.
>> Project maintainers aren't always in agreement with me, so
>> I'll ask here: if a python module is completely useless by
>> itself, is it proper submitting it to d:l:py ?
>
> I assume that you are talking about sr#560776 [1] - having python-
> python-mpv in mm:apps does not make it correct lication - as python
> library it belongs either to d:l:p or mm:libs. python-python-mpd2 does
> not seem tu be multimedia relate application at all.

Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official
position on the matter?

Regards




--
Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Martin Pluskal-2
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
> Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official
> position on the matter?
Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official
clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of
mm:app? Five?

Regards

M

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Luigi Baldoni
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
> On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
>> Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official
>> position on the matter?
> Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official
> clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of
> mm:app? Five?

Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer catches
the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy.
Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be moved
to d:l:py.

Regards




--
Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Tomas Chvatal
Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:

> Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
> > On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
> > > Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official
> > > position on the matter?
> >
> > Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official
> > clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of
> > mm:app? Five?
>
> Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer
> catches
> the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy.
> Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be moved
> to d:l:py.
>
It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be someone whom
would think it is still fitting and some would consider it otherwise.

I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just library I
would say it should not really land there, unless it is a linkpac for
something else built from the same source...

Cheers

Tom


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Luigi Baldoni
Tomas Chvatal wrote

> Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:
>> Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
>> > On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
>> > > Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an official
>> > > position on the matter?
>> >
>> > Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs official
>> > clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers of
>> > mm:app? Five?
>>
>> Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer
>> catches
>> the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy.
>> Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be moved
>> to d:l:py.
>>
>
> It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be someone whom
> would think it is still fitting and some would consider it otherwise.
>
> I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just library I
> would say it should not really land there, unless it is a linkpac for
> something else built from the same source...

To be precise, unofficial (or official but separate) python bindings for a
multimedia library.

Should they go to d:l:py and be linked perhaps?

Regards




--
Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Martin Pluskal-2
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 03:19 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:

> Tomas Chvatal wrote
> > Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:
> > > Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
> > > > On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
> > > > > Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an
> > > > > official
> > > > > position on the matter?
> > > >
> > > > Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs
> > > > official
> > > > clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers
> > > > of
> > > > mm:app? Five?
> > >
> > > Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer
> > > catches
> > > the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy.
> > > Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be
> > > moved
> > > to d:l:py.
> > >
> >
> > It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be someone
> > whom
> > would think it is still fitting and some would consider it
> > otherwise.
> >
> > I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just library I
> > would say it should not really land there, unless it is a linkpac
> > for
> > something else built from the same source...
>
> To be precise, unofficial (or official but separate) python bindings
> for a
> multimedia library.
>
> Should they go to d:l:py and be linked perhaps?
>
Why would they need to be linked - is something else depending on such
python bindings library?

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Luigi Baldoni
Martin Pluskal-2 wrote

> On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 03:19 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
>> Tomas Chvatal wrote
>> > Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:
>> > > Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
>> > > > On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
>> > > > > Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an
>> > > > > official
>> > > > > position on the matter?
>> > > >
>> > > > Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs
>> > > > official
>> > > > clarification? What makes position official, three maintainers
>> > > > of
>> > > > mm:app? Five?
>> > >
>> > > Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which maintainer
>> > > catches
>> > > the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy.
>> > > Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be
>> > > moved
>> > > to d:l:py.
>> > >
>> >
>> > It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be someone
>> > whom
>> > would think it is still fitting and some would consider it
>> > otherwise.
>> >
>> > I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just library I
>> > would say it should not really land there, unless it is a linkpac
>> > for
>> > something else built from the same source...
>>
>> To be precise, unofficial (or official but separate) python bindings
>> for a
>> multimedia library.
>>
>> Should they go to d:l:py and be linked perhaps?
>>
> Why would they need to be linked - is something else depending on such
> python bindings library?

I'll have to check, but in the case of python-python-vlc a separate package
has a runtime dependency on it.

Ceteris paribus, do you recommend them to be moved?

Regards




--
Sent from: http://opensuse.14.x6.nabble.com/opensuse-packaging-f3359936.html
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Python modules and libraries

Martin Pluskal-2
On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 04:39 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:

> Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
> > On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 03:19 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
> > > Tomas Chvatal wrote
> > > > Luigi Baldoni píše v Út 02. 01. 2018 v 02:55 -0700:
> > > > > Martin Pluskal-2 wrote
> > > > > > On Tue, 2018-01-02 at 02:36 -0700, Luigi Baldoni wrote:
> > > > > > > Indeed I am. Could the mm maintainers come up with an
> > > > > > > official
> > > > > > > position on the matter?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Which part of "python library is not multimedia app" needs
> > > > > > official
> > > > > > clarification? What makes position official, three
> > > > > > maintainers
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > mm:app? Five?
> > > > >
> > > > > Since this seems like a coin toss depending on which
> > > > > maintainer
> > > > > catches
> > > > > the request, it would be nice to have a consistent policy.
> > > > > Also in order to know if the other python packages need to be
> > > > > moved
> > > > > to d:l:py.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It will always be a coin flip. Regardless there always be
> > > > someone
> > > > whom
> > > > would think it is still fitting and some would consider it
> > > > otherwise.
> > > >
> > > > I would say try to apply common sense, but if it is just
> > > > library I
> > > > would say it should not really land there, unless it is a
> > > > linkpac
> > > > for
> > > > something else built from the same source...
> > >
> > > To be precise, unofficial (or official but separate) python
> > > bindings
> > > for a
> > > multimedia library.
> > >
> > > Should they go to d:l:py and be linked perhaps?
> > >
> >
> > Why would they need to be linked - is something else depending on
> > such
> > python bindings library?
>
> I'll have to check, but in the case of python-python-vlc a separate
> package
> has a runtime dependency on it.
If so, link would be suitable (with building disabled for factory)
>
> Ceteris paribus, do you recommend them to be moved?
puthon-python-vlc seem to be already readied for submission to d:l:p
https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:alarrosa:branches:devel:la
nguages:python/python-python-vlc

M

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment