Hi Russ, > I'm considering breaking the package into two, but I think this is > an acceptable use case when for some reason there are a set of > closely-related modules that make sense to package together. This > tag should probably gain some of the code that's already present for > shared libraries to not warn about package naming as long as at least > one module in the package satisfies the naming convention. I am not so sure, this is reasonably common and a good practice for Apache modules. I'm sure there are one or two exceptions in the archives, but that's what overrides are for. On the downside, there is nothing to gain if you bundle modules together, whether they are related or not, right? I am just not sure this a behavior Lintian should endorse be remaining quiet. On the other you, and Niels, are more into Lintian as I am, so I guess that's more of a design decision for you. -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature