Bug#660165: [new check] Source package names for R libraries (and others if appropriate).
Package: lintian
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Dear Lintian maintainers,
The correspondance between source and binary package names has been discussed
on the debian-devel mailing list recently.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/02/msg00622.html
In particular, it has been proposed that, for source package producing a single
binary package, their names should be the same, and follow a naming scheme that
prevents possible clash with unrelated packages using the same name upstream.
Pros and cons have been reminded or identified in this discussion, and I would
like them to be easy to find for refreshing our memories in the future.
Policy, DEP and lintian have been proposed as a vector, and my conclusion is
that, for some subsets of packages, lintian is a good place.
To start, I propose the following new lintian tag, to be applied on packages in
the gnu-r section and any other sections for which there is a consensus.
Improvements on the wording are much welcome.
source-and-binary-package-names-do-not-match
Source packages in the gnu-r section that produce only one binary package
should use the same name.
This rule guarantees that there will be no name conflict even if the upstream
names are generic and used in unrelated projects. It also prevents having
unrelated source and a binary packages with the same name in the Debian
archive.
Severity: normal, Certainty: certain
You may have noted that there is no patch attached... While, if there is
agreement to create this new tag, I will try to implement it, everybody is most
welcome to be faster than me on this.
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: