[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#484809: package naming recommendations

On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 05:45:06PM +0200, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Package: developers-reference
> Severity: wishlist
> Hi,
> I wonder whether the developer's reference should offer recommendations  
> for the naming of packages along the lines of:
> - for source packages do not blindly take the name of the upstream
>   tarball but consider something related to the binary package's naming
>   scheme
>   (rationale: namespace for source packages seems to be fairly
>    polluted. In particular having binary and source packages of the
>    same name seems undesirable)
> - for libary packages, the package name should match with the soname
>   (as checked by lintian) unless there is a compelling (non-aesthetic)
>   reason not to.
>   (rationale: the lintian warning seems to be a good way to
>   indicate when something unexpectedly happened to the soname if the
>   package started out using a name lintian does not warn about)

What a coincident.

My old bug report to policy Bug#253511 was closed today and I realized
it should have been to developers-reference thus reassigned.  Then I
found this one.  Basically the same issue.


Reply to: