On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 1:00 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 16. 12. 19 16:56, Neal Gompa wrote:
> For what it's worth. I think %pycached is a nice improvement. I'm not
> sure if I like the name of it specifically, but the behavior is quite
> desirable.
Naming things ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I was thinking:
%with_pycache - collides with bconds
%include_pycache - quite long
%pyc - quite indecipherable
%pycache - might be mistaken to only include the pyc files
%pycached doesn't sound that bad to me - include that file, but also its cached
Python bytecode. However I am not a native speaker and I realize I often
desecrate the English language. Got any better suggestions?
%pyfile is probably quite enough for that. It looks and feels like a
marker instead of something strange, and the underlying behavior is
somewhat immaterial.
> In the next year, we could look at leveraging the INSTALLED_FILES
> stuff that setuptools, et al. produce and enhance it with %pycached
> (or whatever) so that we grab not just the files it copied, but all
> the byte-compiled files too. The mechanism in which to do so will be
> somewhat interesting, since making that file get produced during
> python builds is no longer quite so simple with the advent of PEP
> 517/518 based projects... But it's something to look forward to.
See also this e-mail (the second half):
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.o...
Yeah, it's going to get very ugly to do this reasonably well.
--
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!