Re: "py-" prefix shouldn't be needed for Python-based ports that are programs, not libraries

I agree with this. Some Python libraries are grey areas where they have helper programs and a library. Or a full on program and a library.

But some make a very clear distinction and are not designed to be imported at all. Those would probably be fine to drop the py- prefix, and associate it with the latest workable Python version, or perhaps the one used most heavily (currently Python 3.9, I guess.)

Alternatively, I have thought some about Python packages. It seems a wheel could be shipped. Some wheels have narrow parameters, like only Python 3.10 and a certain architecture. But many are highly generic, say Python 3.8-3.12. With these, the wheel could be shipped and pip installed, say with `python3.XX -m pip install foo.whl`. The package same package would work for any number of Python versions in this instance.

Anyway, just an unrelated thought.

-Henrich

Feb 16, 2024, 13:39 by jamie@catflap.org:

> I've often thought this. I assumed there where technical reasons. However,
> it does seem weird that, for instance, borgbackup is py-borgbackup, when
> it's a command line program called borgbackup.
>
> We don't have c-git, or sh-freebsd-snapshot or even with perl,
> perl-get_iplayer!
>
> Even with pyton, it's not coherent - yt-dlp is python, yet doesn't have
> the py prefix.
>
> Jamie
>