[py3porters-devel] Bug#782942: Please provide a python3 module

[Ben Finney]

Brian May <brian at microcomaustralia.com.au>
writes:

> What is the benefit of putting the binary in *-bin, instead of leaving
> it in the python3-* package and requiring users to install the
> python3-* package?

I don't know enough about what this package's target audience is to
answer specifically.

Generally: A package named ‘python-foo’ or ‘python3-foo’ is specifically
targeting users who know they will be *programming* in Python 2 or
Python 3, and are looking for a package to install libraries for that
language.

If the prospective user of the *program* ‘foocommand’ might not care
about the implementation language, then the program should not be owned
by the ‘python3-foo’ package.

Only if the entire target userbase for the program ‘foocommand’ will
always be thinking “I specifically want the one implemented in Python
3”, would it be appropriate to have that program owned by ‘python3-foo’.

If there is any reasonable chance such a prospective user might be
looking for ‘foocommand’ but not care whether Python 3 implements the
command, then the program should be in a package without a
language-specific name.

-- 
 \     “If I had known what it would be like to have it all... I might |
  `\     have been willing to settle for less.” —Jane Wagner, via Lily |
_o__)                                                           Tomlin |
Ben Finney