On Thursday, December 31, 2015 06:32:43 PM Diego M. Rodriguez wrote: > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 02:07:05PM -0500, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Diego M. Rodriguez > > <diego.pl...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:56:20PM -0500, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > > > I think the respective maintainers should talk and then discuss with > > > their upstreams as the collision potential isn't just in Debian. > > > > > > I'm chiming in as the (prospective) maintainer of the ITP > > > python-jellyfish > > > package, just to note that I have discussed it with Andreas [1] and > > > fully > > > agreed to rename "my" package. The choice of name was due to not being > > > aware > > > of the Python bindings on the existing DNA-jelyfish package (and in part > > > also > > > due to my inexperience on these matters), and I have contacted upstream > > > earlier today in the hopes of coming up with a good alternative name. > > > > > > I'd be happy to follow up on the discussion with upstream once I get a > > > reply, > > > in order to find out if he would be open to solving the conflict at a > > > "higher" > > > level. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=806716#42 > > > -- > > > Diego M. Rodriguez > > > 36B3 42A9 9F2F 2CFB F79B FF9B B6C4 B901 06BC E232
> > > > > That won't solve the problem, since both will provide the python > > module jellyfish > > Fair point indeed, and I fully agree that ideally the problem should be > solved at the python module level. > > I'm wondering if you or other senior, more experienced developers could > suggest what would be the recommended solution for the namespace conflict, > taking into account: > > a) DNA-jellyfish is an stablished Debian package since 2011 [1] > b) STR-jellyfish is on PyPI [2] since 2010 (version 0.1) > c) both packages started their Github repos around the same time (summer > 2010) d) both packages seem to be a bit "niche" (popcon stats for > "jellyfish" [3] and "beets" [4], the package that would depend on > STR-jellyfish, seem to hint that they are both modestly used within Debian > and cater to specific groups of users) > e) other considerations I'm probably missing! > > I would personally place a bit more weight on the fact that STR-jellyfish is > already on PyPI (based on the rationale that it is arguably the "de facto" > repository for Python packaging); but, again, I am relatively new to Debian > practices and arguing for keeping consistency within the Debian repository > seems reasonable to me as well. > > Best regards, > > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=644925 > [2] https://pypi.python.org/pypi/jellyfish > [3] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=jellyfish > [4] https://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=beets Here's what Debian Policy has to say on the matter: 10.1. Binaries -------------- Two different packages must not install programs with different functionality but with the same filenames. (The case of two programs having the same functionality but different implementations is handled via "alternatives" or the "Conflicts" mechanism. See Section 3.9, `Maintainer Scripts' and Section 7.4, `Conflicting binary packages - `Conflicts'' respectively.) If this case happens, one of the programs must be renamed. The maintainers should report this to the `debian-devel' mailing list and try to find a consensus about which program will have to be renamed. If a consensus cannot be reached, _both_ programs must be renamed. That bit of policy doesn't officially kick in yet since these aren't both in the archive yet. The policy is about consensus finding and not winning and losing. That's why I recommended discussing with the upstreams (and hopefully getting them in direct communication). Scott K P.S. Fixed top posting
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
