Open Stack

On 09/04/2018 06:25 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> On 09/04/2018 12:17 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>> Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2018-09-04 12:08:41 -0400:
>>> On 09/04/2018 11:44 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>>> Excerpts from Chris Dent's message of 2018-09-04 15:32:12 +0100:
>>>>> On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Jay Pipes wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there a reason we couldn't have openstack-placement be the
>>>>>> package name?
>>>>>
>>>>> I would hope we'd be able to do that, and probably should do that.
>>>>> 'openstack-placement' seems a find pypi package name for a think
>>>>> from which you do 'import placement' to do some openstack stuff,
>>>>> yeah?
>>>>
>>>> That's still a pretty generic name for the top-level import, but I
>>>> think
>>>> the only real risk is that the placement service couldn't be installed
>>>> at the same time as another package owned by someone else that used
>>>> that
>>>> top-level name. I'm not sure how much of a risk that really is.
>>>
>>> You mean if there was another Python package that used the package name
>>> "placement"?
>>>
>>> The alternative would be to make the top-level package something like
>>> os_placement instead?
> 
> Either one works for me. Though I'm pretty sure that it isn't necessary.
> The reason it isn't necessary is because the stuff in the top-level
> placement package isn't meant to be imported by anything at all.

In a distro, no 2 package can hold the same file. That's forbidden. This
has nothing to do if someone has to "import placemement" or not.

Just saying this, but *not* that we should rename (I didn't spot any
conflict yet and I understand the pain it would induce). This command
returns nothing:

apt-file search placement | grep python3/dist-packages/placement

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)