Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/carlwgeorge/reviews/epel-7-x86_64/01037843-libselinux-python3/libselinux-python3.spec
SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/carlwgeorge/reviews/epel-7-x86_64/01037843-libselinux-python3/libselinux-python3-2.5-1.el7.src.rpm
The libselinux-python3 package contains python 3 bindings for developing
Fedora Account System Username: carlwgeorge
This is an EPEL7-only package. Red Hat added python3 to RHEL 7.7, but has declined to turn on the python3 subpackage in the libselinux spec file. This spec file is essentially that subpackage extracted. See bug 1719978 for more information.
Can this be python3-libselinux to match Fedora? It can provide libselinux-python3.
See https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python3-rpm for a similar package.
Also, technically by the "de facto" EPEL guidelines, this package should generate a python36-libselinux subpackage (see the rpm example from previous comment). However there are no "de jure" Python 3 EPEL guidelines.
I would like to keep it libselinux-python3, so that if RHEL does eventually enable that subpackage, it will be a natural upgrade without messing with obsoletes.
I also think it would be confusing to users to see libselinux-python and python3-libselinux.
Of course if this is a blocker, I don't mind renaming it to python3-libselinux. It's just not my first choice.
I don't really care. It was only my suggestion. The fact that the 34/36 guidelines don't exists makes this mostly about compromises.
This information just came in: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1719978#c26
Excellent new, thanks for the heads up Miro. Closing the review since it will not be needed.