Talk:Python package policies: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
(Add to discussion about _pyname / _pkgnam) |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
_pyname was per ncopa's suggestion, I don't have a problem with it. | _pyname was per ncopa's suggestion, I don't have a problem with it. | ||
--[[User:Ddevault|Ddevault]] ([[User talk:Ddevault|talk]]) 15:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC) | --[[User:Ddevault|Ddevault]] ([[User talk:Ddevault|talk]]) 15:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC) | ||
my only issue with _pyname is that it is less common; I agree _pkgname is more common and longer term consistency would be good, we had a discussion about it today on IRC; the consensus there is that it is a private variable and the name doesn't matter. --[[User:Keith.maxwell|Keith.maxwell]] ([[User talk:Keith.maxwell|talk]]) 09:25, 12 April 2020 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:26, 12 April 2020
This page duplicates quite a bit of details which are already present:
- https://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/Package_policies
- https://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/APKBUILD_examples:Python
Instead of creating a new page the existing information should be updated.
`_py2_depends` and `_py3_depends` are more consistent with the other variable names and preferable to '_py2_deps' and '_py3_deps' in my opinion.
Agreed, but I've removed all of the Python 2 details entirely pending the coming EoL. --Ddevault (talk) 15:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
_pyname is much less common than _pkgname although _pkgname is used for many things; would be good to have a clear recommended name
_pyname was per ncopa's suggestion, I don't have a problem with it. --Ddevault (talk) 15:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
my only issue with _pyname is that it is less common; I agree _pkgname is more common and longer term consistency would be good, we had a discussion about it today on IRC; the consensus there is that it is a private variable and the name doesn't matter. --Keith.maxwell (talk) 09:25, 12 April 2020 (UTC)