Packagization

[odinuv]

should be installable as a package

[pocin]

Before the package gets adopted I would suggest thinking about a proper name.
There are 2 that needs to be thought of (I think)

First, the package name

from sapiclient import ... is imo not very descriptive

I'd suggest at least prefixing it with kbc or keboola, so something like:

• kbcstorage (from kbcstorage import Client)
• kbcsapiclient (from kbcsapiclient import Client)
• kbcsapi (from kbcsapi import Client)
  or something alike.

Second, the PyPi name (again $ pip install sapiclient doesn't feel right to me).

Or are we ok with installing directly from github $ pip install git+git://github.com/keboola/sapi-python-client.git as in https://github.com/keboola/python-docker-application?
This can be same as the (importable) package name, but can be different.

How do you feel about

• pip install keboola-storage-client
• pip install kbc-storage-client
• pip install kbc-sapi-client

Or any other suggestions?

On a related note - Does merging this sapi functionality with the https://github.com/keboola/python-docker-application makes sense?

from keboola import StorageClient would be great aswell as having all keboola related stuff under one package. (Are there any other components which would benefit from Python bindings?)

[pivnicek]

I'll respond from bottom to top:)

imho, this client is mainly intended for external python applications to interact with the keboola storage api, rather than keboola python docker applications, as our docker layer handles the storage interface for us in those cases. (@odinuv do you agree with that assessment?)

for naming I really like from keboola import StorageClient

and I like pip install keboola-storage-client but am fine with installing directly via github too.

[pocin]

Just to be clear on one thing: for the from keboola import StorageClient to work we would have to either a) merge this with the python-docker-application, or b) rename the python-docker-application

I don' see any other way around this, since the python-docker-application already "owns" the keboola namespace

Edit:
Now I realized I used the term merge in a wrong way. It definitely wouldn't make sense to directly merge it into the docker app, but maybe create a brand new "keboola" app (and keep the old docker existing to not break existing apps) which would contain both the docker and the StorageClient.

Ok, let's start with installing from GitHub directly and not complicate things with PyPi

[pivnicek]

Ah ic, yes of course, that's too bad. That becomes a point in favour of the merge idea then.

[odinuv]

we definitely don't want to merge this into docker-application, they are two completely unrelated things. Sharing the namespace would be nice - but AFAIK, unless we want installing from pypi it's not a problem - i don't see a real difference between
pip install git+git://github.com/keboola/sapi-python-client
and
pip install keboola-storage-client

[pocin]

I used the term merge in a wrong way. It definitely wouldn't make sense to directly merge it into the docker app, but maybe create a brand new "keboola-python-bindings" app (and keep the old docker existing to not break existing apps) which would contain both the docker and the StorageClient.

If not, then I am strongly against naming this package keboola (therefore no from keboola import StorageClient). I think this would bring only confusion and what would you do if you wanted to have installed both?

[odinuv]

so how about kbc ?

[pocin]

kbc sounds reasonable to me

Just to make sure we are on the same boat:

• The repo will be kept as is -> https://github.com/keboola/sapi-python-client/
• So far make it installable via pip install git+git:///github.com/keboola/sapi-python-client.git

And the directory structure will be something like this:

sapi-python-client
├── kbc
│   ├── __init__.py
│   ├── exceptions.py
│   ├── somemodule.py
│   └── storage.py
└── readme.MD
└── .git
└── .gitignore

which will allow

from kbc import storage

from kbc.storage import StorageClient

and if we do from .storage import StorageClient inside sapi-python-client/kbc/__init__.py we will be able to do just
from kbc import StorageClient

Makes sense? If so, I'll prepare a PR

[pivnicek]

seems reasonable enough to me 👍 , with tests and package docs that would make

sapi-python-client
├── doc
├── kbc
│   ├── __init__.py
│   ├── exceptions.py
│   ├── somemodule.py
│   └── storage.py
├── test
└── readme.MD
└── .git
└── .gitignore

and at that point we can throw it on travis

[odinuv]

wouldn't it be better to have just client.py ? So that we can have metadata.py and components.py in future like here https://github.com/keboola/storage-api-php-client/tree/master/src/Keboola/StorageApi

[odinuv]

come to think about it - it would be probably better to name the package kbc_storage - in the end it will be only storage API client (and they may be other clients, such as provisioning in future)

[pivnicek]

Good point, in that case we could rename the repo to keboola/python-client and then all keboola clients can live under a shared namespace of say keboola_client

[odinuv]

why? the clients are unrealated and pypi doesn't have real namespaces anyway