Re: python3-<module> packages must not depend on python<module> packages and vice versa

[Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>]

On 11 August 2014 02:25, Barry Warsaw <barry@debian.org> wrote:

Agreed!  If there are bits and pieces useful to both the Python 2 and 3

versions, please consider adding a -common or functionally similar binary
package to hold them.  I guess in some cases it wouldn't be completely
horrible to just duplicate the files in both the python- and python3-
packages, but I generally don't like to do that unless it's really less size
and effort to do so (e.g. one or two files).

Not to get confused with python-*-common and python-*-doc packages are for both python versions.

It is possible that there might be python3 packages depending on python- packages simply because the required Python3 packages haven't been built yet (or upstream doesn't support Python3 yet). Can't think of a good example though. In most cases a python-* dependency will not be sufficient from a python3-* package.

--
Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>