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

Stéphane Gaudreault stephane at archlinux.org
Wed Nov 28 07:07:27 EST 2012

Le 2012-11-28 01:53, Allen Li a écrit :
> 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?
If it is an application and does not provide a module that could be 
included in another application, then I suggest to depend on python3 
only and keep the name "flake8".


More information about the aur-general mailing list