On Tue, Apr 08 2014, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> I would like for us to continue to use the oslo prefix in some cases,
> because it makes naming simple libraries easier but more importantly
> because it is an indicator that we intend those libraries to be much
> more useful to OpenStack projects than t
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08 2014, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>
>> I would like for us to continue to use the oslo prefix in some cases,
>> because it makes naming simple libraries easier but more importantly
>> because it is an indicator that we intend those li
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 15:24 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>> We can avoid adding to the problem by putting each new library in its
>> own package. We still want the Oslo name attached for libraries that
>> are really only meant to be used by O
Donald linked to a pip bug later in this thread, so we might be able
to help by working on a fix. I haven't investigated that, but I assume
if it was easy the pypa team would have already fixed it.
When you saw the problem, were you running a current version of
devstack with Sean's change to insta
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 6:12 AM, Victor Stinner
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le mardi 8 avril 2014, 10:54:24 Julien Danjou a écrit :
>> On Mon, Apr 07 2014, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>> > We can avoid adding to the problem by putting each new library in its
>> > own package. We still want the Oslo name attached for
Vishvananda Ishaya wrote:
> I dealt with this myself the other day and it was a huge pain. That said,
> changing all the packages seems like a nuclear option.
Yeah, package renaming is usually a huge pain for distributions, and we
already forced them through some oslo reversioning/renaming process
Hi,
Le mardi 8 avril 2014, 10:54:24 Julien Danjou a écrit :
> On Mon, Apr 07 2014, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > We can avoid adding to the problem by putting each new library in its
> > own package. We still want the Oslo name attached for libraries that
> > are really only meant to be used by OpenSta
On Mon, Apr 07 2014, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> We can avoid adding to the problem by putting each new library in its
> own package. We still want the Oslo name attached for libraries that
> are really only meant to be used by OpenStack projects, and so we need
> a naming convention. I'm not entirely
On Apr 8, 2014, at 3:28 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 15:24 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>> We can avoid adding to the problem by putting each new library in its
>> own package. We still want the Oslo name attached for libraries that
>> are really only meant to be used by Ope
On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 15:24 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> We can avoid adding to the problem by putting each new library in its
> own package. We still want the Oslo name attached for libraries that
> are really only meant to be used by OpenStack projects, and so we need
> a naming convention. I'm
I dealt with this myself the other day and it was a huge pain. That said,
changing all the packages seems like a nuclear option. Is there any way
we could change python that would make it smarter about searching multiple
locations for namespace packages?
Vish
On Apr 7, 2014, at 12:24 PM, Doug Hel
11 matches
Mail list logo
