Re: ocamlodbc packaging
Ralf Treinen wrote:
> No! ocamlweb is the upstream name, and hence is the name of the package.
Well, I know why I do not agree with this sentence, this is just because
I'm thinking about source package and I suppose that you're speaking
about binary package.
When compiling source packages you can see that they may provide several
binary packages (and thus, several (different!!) names, this implies
that there is no (so) direct relationship between upstream names and
debian names, of course it is preferable to keep close the former and
the latter!)
Speaking about ocamlweb **JUST AN EXAMPLE !!**,
the source package (which can be considered as upstream package for the
corresponding binary package), could be named "ocaml-web", stating that
it provides all the things needed to make litteral programming (web)
within OCaml (ocaml).
May be, when compiling, this package can provide (following a scheme I
often encounter when compiling Debian stuff)
- package "ocamlweb" (providing the (binary) tool)
- package "ocaml-libweb (providing a reusable library)
- package "ocaml-web-dev (providing ...)
> No !!!
>
> Can anyone give me good reason why we should name all ocaml packages
> in uniform way? This is just weird.
Keep cool Ralph ...
I just said that I like such (uniform) names, kind of personal taste...
I did not said that JCF has to change from ocamlweb to ocaml-web !!
(and that every upstream authors have to do so ...)
But for the choice of new names, things are opened to discussion (I
think), after all there is a naming scheme for debian library packages
(don't know if it is stated somewhere ...)
So, why not ?? i.e it is not sufficient to say "no" to prevent people to
**try** a naming scheme for **incoming** stuff. What I expect from you,
since you have a more deeper understanding of the Debian policy, is
something like "you can't do that because it is stated <somewhere> that
you have to do things like the this...".
OK, I would like to call a new package "ocaml-libplot" :
- original name is "ocamlplot"
I think it is confusing since it is more a binding (OCaml/GNU plot
library) than a single binary (despite the fact that it also provides a
toplevel [if I remember well]
- debian name is more informative (this is ocaml stuff, providing a
*lib*rary for making *plot*s...
Why not ??
--
# Georges MARIANO tel: (33) 03 20 43 84 06
# INRETS, 20 rue Élisée Reclus fax: (33) 03 20 43 83 59
# 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq mailto:georges.mariano@inrets.fr
# FRANCE.
# http://www3.inrets.fr/estas/mariano
# http://www3.inrets.fr/B-Bibliography
Reply to: