Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

'websocket' clashes with other popular python libraries #60

Open
mtford90 opened this issue Jan 19, 2014 · 5 comments
Open

'websocket' clashes with other popular python libraries #60

mtford90 opened this issue Jan 19, 2014 · 5 comments

Comments

@mtford90
Copy link

''websocket' is quite a generic, all-encompassing name for a package that is only a client and causes issues when using other websocket libraries (.e.g. those that provide a server implementation) in the same python installation.

@liris
Copy link
Collaborator

liris commented Mar 17, 2014

Well...
It's too late to change module name....

change module installation environment by virtualenv or something like that....

@engn33r
Copy link
Collaborator

engn33r commented Apr 30, 2021

I understand websocket is quite generic, but I am not aware of a solution to this currently that could change the name without impacting all projects using websocket-client as a dependency. If you know of solution, please share and we can consider whether a name change is worth the effort. Closing as won't fix due to lack of a clear solution.

@engn33r engn33r closed this as completed Apr 30, 2021
@hughperkins
Copy link

Make the name change in a major version upgrade.

Existing users will be version locked to the current major version. They can choose to upgrade to the new major version if they wish, at which point they will change the imported name.

@hughperkins
Copy link

(I mean, in general, myself, and people around me, put things like this in requirements files:

some_package >=1.5.7,<2.0.0

)

@engn33r
Copy link
Collaborator

engn33r commented Jun 12, 2023

Reopening because the idea of changing the name to "websocket-client" on a future major version upgrade is a good idea for the long term, even if it causes some confusion in the short term

@engn33r engn33r reopened this Jun 12, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants