Open Stack

Just something to note; anvil has never ran had issues with this (afaik).

It seems fairly easy to have a mapping/algorithm/other... that is used 
imho (and this is just what anvil has); I don't recall that the number 
of problems with weird names has been any real issue when building 
rpms... It's sometimes an annoyance but meh, make better tooling in that 
case?

Some of the mapping + other tweaks @ 
https://github.com/stackforge/anvil/blob/master/conf/distros/redhat.yaml#L9

Also the code at:

https://github.com/stackforge/anvil/blob/master/tools/py2rpm#L161 (which 
does the brute work of most of the openstack *non-core* project package 
building). The *core* (nova, glance...) project spec files are treated 
specially @ 
https://github.com/stackforge/anvil/tree/master/conf/templates/packaging/specs 
(these are cheetah templates that are expanded; allowing for 
conditionals like '#if $newer_than_eq('2014.2')' to work...)

Food for thought,

-Josh

Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 01/24/2015 02:01 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015, at 07:48 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've just noticed that oslo.log made it to global-requirements.txt 9
>>> days ago. How come are we still adding some name.spaced oslo libs?
>>> Wasn't the outcome of the discussion in Paris that we shouldn't do that
>>> anymore, and that we should be using oslo-log instead of oslo.log?
>>>
>>> Is three something that I am missing here?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
>> The naming is described in the spec:
>> http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/oslo-specs/specs/kilo/drop-namespace-packages.html
>>
>> tl;dr - We did it this way to make life easier for the packagers.
>>
>> Doug
>
> Hi Doug,
>
> Sorry for the late reply.
>
> Well, you're not making the life of *package maintainers* more easy,
> that's in fact the opposite way, I'm afraid.
>
> The Debian policy is that Python module packages should be named after
> the import statement in a source file. Meaning that if we do:
>
> import oslo_db
>
> then the package should be called python-oslo-db. This means that I will
> have to rename all the Debian packages to remove the dot and put a dash
> instead. But by doing so, if OpenStack upstream is keeping the old
> naming convention, then all the requirements.txt will be "wrong" (by
> wrong, I mean from my perspective as a package maintainer), and the
> automated dependency calculation of dh_python2 will put package names
> with dots instead of dashes.
>
> So, what is going to happen, is that I'll have to, for each and every
> package, build a dictionary of translations in debian/pydist-overrides.
> For example:
>
> # cat debian/pydist-overrides
> oslo.db python-oslo-db
>
> This is very error prone, and I may miss lots of dependencies this way,
> leading to the packages having wrong dependencies. I have a way to avoid
> the issue, which would be to add a Provides: python-oslo.db in the
> python-oslo-db package, but this should only be considered as a
> transition thing.
>
> Also, as a side note, but it may be interesting for some: the package
> python-oslo-db should have Breaks: python-oslo.db (<<  OLD_VERSION) and
> Replaces: (<<  OLD_VERSION), as otherwise upgrades will simply fail
> (because 2 different packages can't contain the same files on the
> filesystem).
>
> So if you really want to make our lives more easy, please do the full
> migration, and move completely away from dots.
>
> Also, I'd like to tell you that I feel very sorry that I couldn't attend
> the session about the oslo namespace in Paris. I was taken by my company
> to a "culture building" session all the afternoon. After reading the
> above, I feel sorry that I didn't attend the namespace session instead. :(
>
> Cheers,
>
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev