[aur-general] Naming convention for Python 2 and 3 apps

[Allen Li]

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 07:43:07PM -0500, Yichao Yu wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 2:48 PM, 小龙 陈 <chillermillerlong at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Allen,
> >
> > I think the convention is to make two packages for software that
> > support both Python 2 and 3. For example, in the extra repo, there's
> >
> > python-cairo and python2-cairo
> > python-cchardet and python2-cchardet
> > python-memcached and python2-memcached
> > etc.
> 
> Well, both of them are python libraries, which cannot support both
> python2 and python3 in the same binary package (OK, you can, by
> including both python2 and python3 modules but that's not the
> point....)
> 
> According to a previous email on the same list[1], you probably still
> need to create two packages for pyton2 and python3 if you want to
> support both of them (and probably rename the binary to avoid
> conflict.)
> 
> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/aur-general@archlinux.org/msg19241.html

Well, the problem is flake8 is a python app, not a library.  Maybe I'm
worrying about nothing, but should the python-*, python2-* naming
convention also be used in this case?