On September 4, 2017 11:42:56 AM EDT, Mathias Behrle <mbeh...@debian.org> wrote:
>
>Hi Christoph, hi folks,
>
>there exists an odd namespace conflict for python-magic.
>
>Current python(3)-magic in Debian is built from source package
>'file'[0].
>According to the included setup.py the package for the python bindings
>are
>published as 'file-magic'[1] and are available on PyPi under this
>name[2].
>
>OTOH the package providing python-magic on PyPi[3] is provided by
>another
>Upstream[4].
>
>The cleanest solution for me would look like
>- package file in Debian should provide python(3)-file-magic
>- python-magic should be the package name corresponding to the PyPi
>package
> python-magic[4]
>
>The realization of this solution would create some substantial
>overhead.
>Therefore it will be more adequate to find a different, but
>nevertheless
>meaningful package name for python-magic from [4]. The ugly, but best
>name
>currently on my mind would be python-python-magic.
>
>Any thoughts?
>
>Cheers,
>Mathias
>
>
>[0] https://sources.debian.net/src/file/
>[1] https://sources.debian.net/src/file/1:5.31-1/python/setup.py/
>[2] https://pypi.python.org/pypi/file-magic/0.3.0
>[3] https://pypi.python.org/pypi/python-magic/
>[4] http://github.com/ahupp/python-magic
There is a nearly equivalent situation with the "dns" namespace. There are two
completely unrelated packages; one provides "DNS" and the other provides "dns".
Obviously they can't both be python-dns in Debian. One is python{3}-dns and
the other is python{3}-dnspython.
If you went down that route, instead of python-python-magic, you'd get
python-magicpython. Personally, I like that a little better, but it's a matter
of taste. Policy doesn't provide any guidance for this case.
Scott K
