Re: please advice package names for padre plugins
On Wed, 03 Jun 2009, Ryan Niebur wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 08:26:25AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > Or more difficult if you expect it to follow the perl policy. [It
> > also means that you have to special case padre plugin dependencies
> > when you're looking for them.]
> following perl policy isn't a reason to do something imo. perl
> policy is (correctly) not followed in some other situations.
If the policy is wrong, bugs should be filed, and it should be
> and one time I followed this part of perl policy and later (after it
> was uploaded, oops, that will be a mess to clean up, if I ever do..)
> got told I was wrong.
By whom and in what case?
> I don't want to make that mistake again, so I no longer strictly
> follow this part of perl policy. wrt special casing looking for
> depends, no need to do that, dh-make-perl does this all
> automatically for us.
Except when you're a human being looking for them.
> the padre-plugin-* package naming form makes much more sense imho,
> and it looks better. a user would probably think it's strange to
> install libpadre-plugin-foo-perl, and that package name makes no
> sense (other than "because perl policy says to do that", which most
> users won't even know about). for normal cpan dists, it does make
The entire point of the naming policy is to have a consistent naming
scheme for all perl packages which provide modules. Violating it
should only be done in cases where there is a significant issue with
following the policy, and aesthetics ("looks better") don't really
qualify as a significant issue.
All bad precedents began as justifiable measures.
-- Gaius Julius Caesar in "The Conspiracy of Catiline" by Sallust