Re: rstcheck: how should I package the new public module?

[Julian Gilbey <julian@d-and-j.net>]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 07:15:46PM +0200, Timo Röhling wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> rstcheck used to be a pure CLI application, so I packaged it as
> "rstcheck" with a private module in /usr/share/rstcheck. The latest
> version has added a public module interface, so "import rstcheck"
> has become a thing and the module needs to be installed publicly for
> that.
> 
> My question is: should I move/rename the whole package to
> python3-rstcheck (and keep rstcheck temporarily as transitional
> dummy package), or should I keep /usr/bin/rstcheck in the old
> package indefinitely and only move the module to python3-rstcheck?
> 
> The latter solution feels cleaner to me, because it neatly separates
> the library and the appliation, but at the cost of an almost empty
> binary package, which is frowned upon by the FTP team. Any
> suggestions how I should proceed?

Hi Tim,

We've done exactly that with spyder: spyder contains just the binary,
manpage, desktop file, appdata, icon and reportbug file.  This is also
helpful if there is ever a Python 4.x, as then there will be four
packages: rstcheck, python3-rstcheck and python4-rstcheck.

This information may be of use to you.

Best wishes,

   Julian