[Pulp-dev] PyPI names for Pulp3

Michael Hrivnak mhrivnak at redhat.com
Mon Apr 10 21:05:13 UTC 2017

"pulpproj" has grown on me.

For a while I was fond of something like "pulp_app", thinking as both a
django app and celery app. Then we'd have "pulp_streamer", "pulp_common",
and "pulp_cli" all as top-level namespaces. I still think this would be a
fine approach, but I lean in favor of keeping our current pattern and just
replacing "pulp" with "pulpproj".


On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Brian Bouterse <bbouters at redhat.com> wrote:

> Pulp3 can't use the 'pulp' Python namespace like we did on Pulp2 because
> it's already taken on PyPI and we don't want to conflict. We need to decide
> on some new Python package names.
> I've updated a previous write-up[0] with options we have in this area. It
> talks about package name options for pip installing purposes, and it
> discusses how we will lay out the packages within site-packages.
> I prefer the prefix of 'pulpproj' with "idea 2". I also prefer all
> packages will install under a top level dir. So that would cause platform
> to pip install with:
> pip install pulpproj
> pip install pulpproj_cli
> pip install pulpproj_streamer
> All of ^ packages would be laid out on the filesystem as:
> /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/pulpproj/
> ├── cli
> ├── common
> ├── platform
> └── streamer
> What are your thoughts and ideas? What do you prefer? Also should this
> become a PUP?
> [0]: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/2444#note-7
> -Brian
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev


Michael Hrivnak

Principal Software Engineer, RHCE

Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20170410/c770e766/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list