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

Re: module package naming



On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 08:46:35PM +0100, Thomas Jollans wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> the debian python policy states that module packages should be named 
> python-foo, foo being the module name. I intend to package PySyck, which 
> contains the module/package 'syck', which is also in python-syck (AFAICT 
> PySyck is basically a fork of the upstream bindings).
> Would python-pysyck be a reasonable name for the package, or is something else 
> more adequate ?


  If the module name is syck and that there already is a python-syck
then you're going into trouble, because you will have conflicts between
the two.

  you should call a package python-$(foo) if to use it you have to
"import $(foo)". At least it's what the policy says, and it's IMHO sane.
And if you have two different libraries providing the same module $(foo)
they can't be installed at the same time. In that case, well, I don't
really know what to say. Having two things not really the same called
the same suck. I hardly see someone fork the openssl and say that the
new lib would be called libssl too. That would be disastrous. That's the
same here IMHO.


-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpqadaQGYwwq.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: