I am the packager of mkdocs.

During the review of mkdocs[1], which is a python package for
generating static webpages, I (as reviewer) noticed that it installs a
lot of themes (javascript, fonts and the like) under
/usr/lib/python3/site-packages/mkdocs/themes.


python-sphinx Ipython python-werkzeug and python-django also put .js files under %{python2_sitelib} or %{python3_sitelib} and this only a simple find in my system, so it is safe to think than many python packages put arch indepent data under %{python2_sitelib} and %{python3_sitelib} , removing  bundled fonts and replaced with symlinks.

So all those packages must be fixed or mkdocs can put this data under %{python3_sitelib}
 
My feeling is that this static architecture independent data should
really be installed under /usr/share/mkdocs to comply with the FHS[2].
But the packager (quite reasonably) points out that other packages
such as sphinx install templates and themes under
/usr/lib/python3/site-packages.


For me the data under %{python3_sitelib} is arch indepent, Python code that is not arch indepent is under %{python3_sitearch} so the arch independent argument is not good enough to move these files.

See: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_Python#System_Architecture


So, the question is: is it acceptable for this package to install arch
independent themes (i.e. non-python code) under
/usr/lib/python3/site-packages ?


For me put these files under  /usr/lib/python3/site-packages  is not a bad packaging.