Mathias Behrle wrote... > * Christoph Biedl: " Re: Namespace conflict for python-magic" (Mon, 4 Sep 2017 > 19:38:56 +0200): > > The cleanest solution indeed was to bring both upstreams together and > > ask them to reconcile the APIs and eventually make one of the both > > implementations obsolete. As things happen such an attempt was started > > two years ago but appearently never came to a result. > > Agreed, that this would be the cleanest solution, but as you say there is > little probability, that the two upstreams will work together to merge their > implementations. Still this should be tried first. Also, I'm not that pessimistic, see below. So let's bring the parties involved into the loop: Hello * Christos Zoulas for file(1), and * Adam Hupp for python-magic. A while ago, almost two years by now, there was a short discussion on the file(1) mailing list concerning a merge of the libmagic python bindings. In summary, Adam proposed to end the long-standing confusion, Christos agreed and suggested a possible solution. After that however, nothing visible happened. But now I'd like to give that idea a push. Mostly since on the Debian Python mailing list (also in Cc:) a proposal was made to exchange python-magic in Debian, from the file(1) to the PyPi one. Wearing the maintainer's hat for file(1) in Debian, I opposed this for the sole reason this will break applications that rely on the file(1) version. Resolving this issue upstream will bring benefit for everybody, even at the risk of a bumpy but one-time only transition. What is the status of your project? Do you need some input, suggestions or other incentive to finish this project? Cheers, Christoph > >  The file mailing list server is currently down, so I cannot provide > > URLs. The Message-IDs are > > <CAJTao09xATQYZ3qR-4CR+oOrrqB_W=kYUJV8esOe4b3bdA5nwA@mail.gmail.com> > > <20151020133008.9B79517FDAB@rebar.astron.com> > > Still down:(, If you could provide some content for me that would be nice. Certainly:  [ Adam: ] (...) | Sadly, this has led to regular confusion for our users. I'd be happy | to shutdown my version to avoid more confusion but it seems to be | fairly widely used (200k downloads from pypi last month). It also has | a number of fixes for various issues: libmagic bugs, thread safety, | support for other platforms, etc. | | I'd like to gauge interest in merging these bindings into a single | codebase. Specifically, this would mean: | | - merge magic.py from each package to produce something reasonably | close to API-compatible to both, with some methods marked as | deprecated where it makes sense. | - the merged package would live under the python-magic name in pypi | and in the `file` source distribution. | | I think this would be ideal for everyone involved, but wanted to gauge | your interest before I went to the trouble. (...)  [ Christos: ] | Sure, it would be nice for the users if there was a definitive | python package that had the best features from both. Someone recently | filed a bug report about it: http://bugs.gw.com/view.php?id=477. | Why don't you go ahead and merge them and I will copy the result | over mine, and put a link to your package in the file sources (or | even delete mine, and put a link to your package).
Description: Digital signature