On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 1:00 PM Miro Hrončok mhroncok@redhat.com wrote:
On 16. 12. 19 16:56, Neal Gompa wrote:
For what it's worth. I think %pycached is a nice improvement. I'm not sure if I like the name of it specifically, but the behavior is quite desirable.
Naming things ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I was thinking:
%with_pycache - collides with bconds %include_pycache - quite long %pyc - quite indecipherable %pycache - might be mistaken to only include the pyc files
%pycached doesn't sound that bad to me - include that file, but also its cached Python bytecode. However I am not a native speaker and I realize I often desecrate the English language. Got any better suggestions?
%pyfile is probably quite enough for that. It looks and feels like a marker instead of something strange, and the underlying behavior is somewhat immaterial.
In the next year, we could look at leveraging the INSTALLED_FILES stuff that setuptools, et al. produce and enhance it with %pycached (or whatever) so that we grab not just the files it copied, but all the byte-compiled files too. The mechanism in which to do so will be somewhat interesting, since making that file get produced during python builds is no longer quite so simple with the advent of PEP 517/518 based projects... But it's something to look forward to.
See also this e-mail (the second half):
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/...
Yeah, it's going to get very ugly to do this reasonably well.