[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Python packaging rules again (was: postorius, v2)
From: |
Hartmut Goebel |
Subject: |
Python packaging rules again (was: postorius, v2) |
Date: |
Thu, 2 Feb 2017 13:28:14 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 |
Hi,
I'm reposting this with a different subject, since this question is not
only related to postorius:
What do others think about the central question:
Should django be a "normal" input or a "native" one? What does this
depend on? What are the rules for?
> I'm unsure about the correct handling of django in django-XXX. Can we
> find rules for this to make future packager's life easier?
>
> Should django be a "normal" input or a "native" one? What does this
> depend on?
>
>
> Clear is: django-XXX should not "propagate" django:
>
> * django is a framework, django-XXX is an extension for this framework.
> * If some application is using django-XXX, I'd expect it to have
> django specified as "input", too, since primary it is a django
> application. Maybe even djangoXXX is an optional component
>
>
> Just for the records:
>
> * django-XXX should propagate other django extension it requires.
> o If some application is using django-XXX, if should not care
> about other django extensions django-XXX requires. This is the
> same like as it does not have to care about other python
> packages django-XXX requires.
--
Regards
Hartmut Goebel
| Hartmut Goebel | address@hidden |
| www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |