begging for pyme name change
Jameson Graef Rollins
jrollins at finestructure.net
Thu Oct 13 19:20:36 CEST 2016
On Thu, Oct 13 2016, Justus Winter <justus at g10code.com> wrote:
> I understand and I'm with you. However, there are so many GPGME
> bindings/GnuPG wrappers for Python out there, that many names are
> already taken. As to your suggestion, a cursory search on PyPI revealed
> that there is already pygpg, py-pgp, and python-gnupg. There is also
> pygpgme and GPG.py.
Rather than look at what's on pypi, I would look at what's currently
being distributed by the major distros. python-gpg is not currently
> We considered renaming our pyme, but we did not want to add to the
> already confusing large pile of names. At least pyme sticks out.
Seems like it is just adding to the current confusing pile, though. And
it only sticks out because of how little it relates to upstream names!
> However, if you can come up with a good name that doesn't sound too
> similar to some existing name, feel free to offer suggestions.
These are all legitimate suggestions:
python-gpg ('import gpg')
python-openpgp ('import openpgp')
python-rfc4880 ('import rfc4880)
python-privacy ('import privacy')
python-monkey ('import monkey')
python-gpg is clearly the best of those options.
But obviously what would really be best is 'python-gpgme'. Has there
been any serious effort to reach out to the current holders of the
python-gpgme namespace to see if they would be willing to hand over
their project to gnupg upstream? That would really be globally best for
everyone, since they wouldn't have to maintain their bindings anymore,
their interface is almost identical, and it would reduce the current
clutter of implementations.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 800 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Gnupg-devel