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

Re: Debian Java Policy and JVM languages family package names



On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Wolodja Wentland <debian@babilen5.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 15:56 -0300, Miguel Landaeta wrote:
>
> There are not many Clojure libraries and I still prefer a $LANG-$LIBRARY naming
> scheme as is used by, for example the Python team. But then there are
> numerous examples of the lib$LIBRARY-$LANG scheme in the archive (e.g. -perl)
> to consider it an established one. If you (or anybody else) deems it important
> to use a consistent scheme for all JVM languages then we could (and should
> /now/) decide to do so and rename the few packages accordingly.

I consider important to have a consistent scheme for all these JVM
languages that we are including in the archive.

I prefer to use lib$LIBRARY-$LANG scheme.

>
>> I maintain GPars package and I named it libgpars-groovy-java but I
>> always thought this package name is not quite right.
>
> This naming scheme (i.e. lib$LIBRRARY-$LANG-java) looks indeed quite strange
> and I would have never considered it for Clojure libraries. First and foremost
> because Clojure does not only run on the JVM (there are CLR and Python
> implementations), but also because it is not really related to Java (but the
> JVM at best). All these languages are languages in their own right and just
> happen to be implemented on the JVM now and we should take that into account
> when naming packages.

Yes, that naming scheme reflects my inexperience at that time when I
packaged GPars. I intend to fix it during jessie development.

Cheers,

-- 
Miguel Landaeta, miguel at miguel.cc
secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at http://keyserver.pgp.com/
"Faith means not wanting to know what is true." -- Nietzsche


Reply to: