begging for pyme name change

[Bernhard Reiter]

Daniel,

Am Dienstag 01 November 2016 16:25:26 schrieb Daniel Kahn Gillmor:
> On Tue 2016-11-01 03:48:24 -0400, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> > Again I think that "gnupg" is better,

> i didn't see any proposal to deal with the
> fact that name "gnupg" is currently already taken, both as a pypi
> package ("source package name") and as a python module name ("import
> gnupg"), with the same fairly sophisticated package

my proposal was to use "gnupg2" as a package name to solve the problem.
Adding a number is a solution take by a number of well known python modules 
even in the python standard library. It fits the brand name GnuPG better and 
solves the API problems in a clean and inexpensive way as far as I can see.

>  As it stands, i want to move forward with something with a
> sensible name that only requires a hill of work, and not a mountain ;) I
> hope you'll agree that this is an acceptable tradeoff, and still an
> improvement over "pyme3/pyme" in terms of name recognition and
> usability.

I'll highly appreciate your work on the matter and for leading the discussion. 
If this is the consensus that you have led us to, I will not stand in the 
way. I agree that "python-gpg" is an improvement than "python-pyme". However 
I do not see why that the better "python-gnupg2" is posing "a mountain" of 
work. If other agree with you, it basically means my arguments are not 
considered as valid as yours. 

Anyway I thought I am stateing my different opinion for the record.

Regards,
Bernhard

-- 
www.intevation.de/~bernhard   +49 541 33 508 3-3
Intevation GmbH, Osnabrück, DE; Amtsgericht Osnabrück, HRB 18998
Geschäftsführer Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20161102/c43238dd/attachment.sig>