Bug#175202: debian-policy: [PROPOSAL] Clarify Perl package naming convention with more examples

[Kenneth Pronovici <kenneth.pronovici@cedar-solutions.com>]

Package: debian-policy
Version: 3.5.6.1
Severity: wishlist

I guess this bug could be combined into bug #114920, but I decided to
file it separately, since I'm not sure exactly where that bug is going.

A discussion around bug #175061 (an ITP of mine) highlights some
confusion I had about Perl naming conventions:

   http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=175061

Perhaps it would be worthwhile to update the Perl policy to provide
several other examples of the naming convention.  Section 3.2 looks like
this currently:

   Perl module packages should be named for the primary module
   provided.  The naming convention for module Foo::Bar is
   libfoo-bar-perl. Packages which include multiple modules may
   additionally include provides for those modules using the same
   convention.

I might change the section to read like this:

   Perl module packages should be named for the primary module provided.
   The naming convention is that a "-" should be used in the package
   name where ":" or "::" appear in the Perl module name, but not
   elsewhere.  For example, the naming convention suggests this usage:

      Foo::Bar          libfoo-bar-perl
      Foo::Bar::Baz     libfoo-bar-baz-perl
      Foo::BarBaz       libfoo-barbaz-perl

   Packages which include multiple modules may additionally include
   provides for those modules using the same convention.

KEN

-- System Information
Debian Release: 3.0
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux daystrom 2.4.18 #1 Mon Jun 24 16:21:48 CDT 2002 i686
Locale: LANG=en, LC_CTYPE=en_US

Versions of packages debian-policy depends on:
ii  fileutils                     4.1-10     GNU file management utilities