Re: Correct package name for Perl bindings?
On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 13:42 +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 08:54:13 +0100, TJ wrote:
>
> > However my mentor, Paul Wise, has suggested I ask here since Perl Policy
> > 4.2 suggests package name convention "...for module Foo::Bar is
> > libfoo-bar-perl."
>
> It's more than a suggestion, it's a "should" (i.e. "make it this way
> unless there are very good reasons to do it differently).
>
> > The project uses the Win::Hivex namespace.
> > That suggests the package name here should be "libwin-hivex-perl", which
> > doesn't 'feel' correct. Is "libhivex-perl" acceptable?
>
> AFAICS the dist name is Win::Hivex and it ships two modules
> Win::Hivex and Win::Hivex::Registry, so libwin-hivex-perl seems
> indeed like the logical candidate for the package name in my POV.
>
> Why do you think it doesn't "feel" correct?
Mainly the difference in the binary package name from the other packages
built from the source. the rest all being "libhivex" so "libwin-hivex"
seems, at least in my mind, to disconnect the name-space for users.
I know when I'm looking for packages using dpkg-query or apt-cache I
usually assume/expect that related packages will have a common stub.
I don't object to the name but it just feels counter-intuitive to me.
Reply to: