Open Stack

> 
> This could be overwritten. When it comes to Debian packages, I have put
> manually python-oslo-config as (build-)dependency. With g3, I haven't
> seen any problem.
> 
> Are you here talking about *Ubuntu* packages, and not *Debian*?
I personally was building packages to target Ubuntu, but not for inclusion in Ubuntu. I was following the Debian Python packaging guide.
 
> Yeah, that's the Debian policy for python... I don't see why having
> python- in front is a problem. dh_python2 doesn't really care.
> 
Right, that is fine. The confusion is that with the namespace being 'oslo.config' (or 'zope.interface'), it wasn't clear to me which was really correct in regard to the package being "oslo-config" or "oslo.config".  It was similarly confusing in regard to which value truly belonged in install-requires.  At least in terms of the package name, it wasn't clear from the Debian Python Policy, but it seems that is being clarified.

With Dave Walker's suggestion, with the present value of 'oslo-config' as it is seeded to install-requires, it seems we'd still need to add the following to all the packages?

> debian/pydist-overrides:
>  oslo-config python-oslo.config
> 


In regard to changing 'oslo-config' to 'oslo.config', it seems workable as present, but it also sounds like changing this would be more convenient for packaging in the long term, if we can suffer the short-term consequences (which are relatively minor at present). To be fair, though, the pain is least for us in the OpenStack community and far greater for anyone that happens to desire consuming these libraries as they break out of incubation, which I suppose is a tentative prospect at best.

Regards, 
Eric Windisch