[aur-general] Merge / deletion requests: weasyprint and python3-decorator

Ike Devolder ike.devolder at gmail.com
Sun Mar 18 07:42:43 EDT 2012

Op 18-03-12 12:07, Simon Sapin schreef:
> Le 17/03/2012 18:52, Ike Devolder a écrit :
>> in my oppinion it is worth it, there are people around who dont want any
>> python3 stuff on their pc until they can move everything
>> now your weasyprint combined package pulls a lot of stuff, it is simple
>> in a way that it will always work but you have a*lot*  of overhead there
> Ok I can understand that.
>> so personally i would consider the following:
>> - have python-weasyprint with renamed binary python-weasyprint
>> - have python2-weasyprint with renamed binary python2-weasyprint
>> - have weasyprint with only a binary weasyprint which can start any of
>>    the previous
> Again, I don’t think multiple binaries are useful.
>> *or*
>> - have python-weasyprint only with libs, no binary
>> - have python2-weasyprint only with libs, no binary
>> - have weasyprint which can 'decide' which of the above is installed
>>    and run it with /usr/bin/python or /usr/bin/python2
>>    attached a possibility to switch to the installed version
> python{,2}-weasyprint packages with only libs sound good. I only use it
> as a lib myself; I added the command-line interface because it was easy.
> Actually, it’s probably better to have a long-lived python process than
> to pay the start-up cost every time, even in a non-python application.
> As for the third package, would it depend on one or the other lib package?

i would have weasyprint depend on python-weasyprint
and have python2-weasyprint provide python-weasyprint

so then you can have a choice and provide maximum flexibility

> I found two patterns in existing packages in [community]:
> * python-pygments just removes /usr/bin/pygmentize (python2-pygments has
> it)

it is also an option but it reduces somewhat the flexibility

> * python2-sphinx renames eg. /usr/bin/sphinx-build to sphinx-build2, but
> I guess it could be important to have both if Sphinx need to import the
> documented code.

the renaming you had rejected previously in this thread so i did not
bring it back in.

renaming can have a drawback for other binaries or scripts depending on
your binary name, which would imply a change into those packages too.

> Regards,


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20120318/f3c595e2/attachment.asc>

More information about the aur-general mailing list