begging for pyme name change

[Daniel Kahn Gillmor]

[ james: if you haven't been reading this already, this is the
  continuation of a thread started here:
  https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-devel/2016-October/031810.html ]

On Thu 2016-10-13 13:20:36 -0400, Jameson Graef Rollins wrote:
> 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.

fwiw, i agree that the best name is "python-gpgme", and, having recently
ported a smallish project from python-gpgme to the new
upstream-supported bindings, the interfaces are definitely similar
(though maybe not "almost identical").

I'm cc'ing the upstream maintainer of https://launchpad.net/pygpgme
(James Henstridge) so that he knows this discussion is taking place and
can maybe weigh in here.  afaict there hasn't been a new release of
python-gpgme since 2012.  Maybe he'll be relieved at the thought that
someone else wants to pick it up :)

FWIW, the work for pyme to take over the namespace from python-gpgme
(should James be ok with that) isn't just about changing the name -- it
would also be about supporting the interfaces that python-gpgme has
already established so that its users could use the new version as a
drop-in replacement.  The easiest way to start that work would be to try
to run the python-gpgme test suite
(https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~jamesh/pygpgme/trunk/files/head:/tests/)
against the current pyme and see what breaks.

This sort of "interface merge" might not be possible, of course -- the
two projects might already declare identical interfaces with different
semantics.  In that case (or in the case where James doesn't want to
relinquish responsibility for the python-gpgme module, or if everyone
thinks this is just too much effort), the next-best option might be to
just call it "python-gpgme2"; the incremented name acknowledges that
there is is an interface change, and when people ask "why the 2 in
gpgme2?" we can point back to the older project and say "we didn't want
to deal with a collision".  (i note that the current use of "pyme3" does
something similar, though with an arguably worse name)

wdyt?

     --dkg
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 930 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20161013/20ab03d3/attachment.sig>