On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 08:44:57AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 12:27:29PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > > Please change this to a package name that is less generic, and > > conforms with other OCaml library packages. 'libres-ocaml' would be > > better. > > This is the source package name, as in all ITPs, not the binary package > name. No OCaml package has a source name like libFOO-ocaml, they all > have *binaries* called libFOO-ocaml-dev. > Well, we run into the same thing with the Debian Perl Group. For instance, take the CPAN module Relative.pm. Should the source package be called relative? That would be far too generic. The binary package is definitely called librelative-perl. But then, so is the source package. Having a different name from upstream has never been a problem. In fact, for something like language libraries, especially when they originate from some sort of common language repository like CPAN or CRAN or whatever if OCaml has something similar, it is probably good to have some sort of common naming scheme. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature