On 6/8/20 11:58 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>
>
> On 2020-06-05 16:12, Tomas Orsava wrote:
>> On 6/5/20 2:26 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2020-06-05 11:51, Tomas Orsava wrote:
>>>> On 6/5/20 11:26 AM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>>>>> On 2020-06-03 21:49, Tomas Orsava wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> I have left a few notes about the text itself as comments in the
>>>>>> document.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Comments about the subject matter are inlined below:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/30/20 3:41 PM, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ### Dist-info metadata
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Each Python package **MUST** include *Package Distribution
>>>>>>> Metadata* conforming to [PyPA
>>>>>>>
specifications](https://packaging.python.org/specifications/)
>>>>>>> (specifically, [Recording installed
>>>>>>>
distributons](https://packaging.python.org/specifications/recording-insta...).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This applies to libraries (e.g. `python-requests`) as well as
>>>>>>> tools (e.g. `ansible`).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > XXX what with splitting into subpackages? 1) dist-info
always
>>>>>>> installed, 2) dist-info installed trough a metapackage?
>>>>>>> > * Ideally, do the split upstream
>>>>>>> > * Consider package split between library & tool (see
poetry,
>>>>>>> fedpkg)
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > e.g.
>>>>>>> > When software is split into several subpackages, it is
OK to
>>>>>>> only ship metadata in one built RPM.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> dist-info usually corresponds to an importable module, so
let's
>>>>>> say that it SHOULD be in the same subpackage as the importable
>>>>>> module?
>>>>>
>>>>> But if you split that module, which submodule does the dist-info
>>>>> go to?
>>>>> I'd leave it to the packager; all these cases are different.
>>>>
>>>> That's why I suggested the SHOULD, because there will be
>>>> exceptions. But I think these guidelines might be read by people
>>>> who will not be actively aware of the relationship between
>>>> dist-info and a Python importable module, so I would add guidance
>>>> that these should be together if possible.
>>>
>>> Please suggest the wording you'd like to see.
>>> The one you have has the problem that there can be more importable
>>> modules in one project. It doesn't give any guidance for what to do
>>> if you split the project.
>>>
>>> Of course, if you put importable module(s) in one subpackage and
>>> documentation in another, the dist-info should be with the module(s).
>>
>>
>> I'm trying to read this guide through the eyes of someone starting
>> out with Fedora and/or Python, so I'd rather not assume people know
>> these details.
>>
>> How about:
>>
>> When software is split into several subpackages, it is OK to only
>> ship metadata in one built RPM. If the project contains an
>> importable module(s), the metadata SHOULD be included in the same
>> subpackage as the (main) importable module.
>>
>> (First sentence already was in the text, I included it for context.)
>
> I added it. I put the **SHOULD** sentence near the top of the section
> to align to the organization of the document: rules first,
> explanations/examples under them.
Looks good, thank you.
All in all, really nice document. Let me know if you could use more help
with it!
Tomas
Well, any of the XXX could use help :)
Except maybe the links; those can be dded when we convert from Markdown.