[Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

[Patrick Creech]

I've been doing some preliminary research into a 'Have our cake and eat it too' option.

While getting back up to speed on things pulp, I came across this comment on the FPC ticket:

    https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/671#comment-146777

Buried towards the end of this comment, in the second to last paragraph, is a statement of interest
from a packaging perspective:

    "Moving the common library out of %{site_packages}/pulp and into, for instance,
%{_datadir}/pulp_common/pulp will also fix the conflict".

Something to consider, our Pulp project is not intended to be a general purpose system library.  It
is for pulp purposes only (and pulp plugins).  With that, we don't necessarily need to live in site-
packages.  FWIW, we do something similar with the SCL that was created.

We will have to modify pulp tooling to either set PYTHONPATH (bash script) or sys.path (python
script), but this allows us to keep 'import pulp' while preventing conflicts with the PuLP project. 
This also addresses the Fedora package collision by moving our files out of site-packages as well,
removing the RPM file collision.

After doing some reading on setuptools, we can specify "setup.py install" options in setup.cfg,
allowing us to do this across various ways of distributing our software.

The last piece is how pypi will treat this (as it was expressed to me that pip install pulp_project
is of interest).  My initial reading seems to suggest this as 'just works' with the setup.cfg, but I
would like to verify this.

Thoughts?

Patrick

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20170407/f534d4a1/attachment.sig>