Re: Re: Naming convention for -doc package

[Ghislain Vaillant <ghisvail@gmail.com>]

[Piotr Ożarowski]
> > For instance, I have a source package (pytest-qt) which builds a Python
> > 3 binary package and its corresponding documentation. Right now, they
> > are respectively named python3-pytest-qt and pytest-qt-doc.
> 
> I'd use python-modulename-doc even for new packages that provide
> python3-modulename binary package only

Ok.

> BTW, it's pytestqt, not pytest-qt so binary package name for Python 3
> should be python3-pytestqt (source name: pytest-qt)

Considering pytest plugins aren't meant to be used directly, but by
pytest via the registered entry-point, using "pytestqt" over "pytest-
qt" for the binary package sounded unnecessary to me.

And yes, I do know there is a policy and I follow it closely. In this
particular case however, we would be breaking the consistency between
the naming of the other pytest plugins for no obvious benefit to me.

> > Shall we keep the current python- prefix (as per Python the language,
> > not Python 2 the version)
> 
> that would be my pick

So given your criteria above, you would choose:

- python3-pytestqt
- python-pytestqt-doc

Am I correct?

Is everyone happy with that?

Cheers,
Ghis