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

Re: Large-scale java policy violations

On Sat, Sep 15, 2001 at 01:12:43PM -0500, Adam Heath uttered:
> Sorry for the large cc, but it is about time that debian had a unified policy
> on these package names.

> On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Ben Burton wrote:
> >
> > Okay.  Note that java policy states that "Libraries packages must be named
> > lib-XXX-java."
> I think the java policy is wrong.  Why should java be any different than any
> other interpeted language, when naming packages?
Indeed. Java should follow suit, consistancy, and all that.

> In fact, I see variations in python, perl, and java.  This is what I would
> like to see:
> lib(name)-(language)
> Where name is the upstream name, appropriately named for the package.
Indeed. I just took over the mailtools package, and have renamed it too
libmailtools-perl as per Perl Policy, as should have been done from the

> > Below we see an approximate list of all java library packages available in
> > debian.  One observes that more than *half* of them are named
> > "libXXX-java"
> > instead of "lib-XXX-java".  We even see libpgjava with no dashes
> > whatsoever.
> >
> > Does this bother anyone else but me?
> Yes, it does, but not for the same reason.
I'm also in favour of changing Java Policy to conform to Perl and Python

BOFH excuse #274: It was OK before you touched it.

Attachment: pgpYnWfekacQR.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: