begging for pyme name change
bernhard at intevation.de
Wed Nov 2 09:41:29 CET 2016
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
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.
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...
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the Gnupg-devel