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.
Osamu
Reply to: