Re: Consistent DPMT and PAPT names
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Jonathan Wiltshire
<debian@jwiltshire.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 08:29:30PM +0200, anatoly techtonik wrote:
>> Why not to choose consistent naming scheme for Python groups?
>> Like PMPT and PAPT or DPMT and DPAT?
>
> Presently they're not easily confused or mis-typed, which is actually quite
> useful when you work in both teams.
>
>> BTW, what are differences in packaging between Application and Module
>> - any FAQ links?
>
> Debian Python Policy? Sections 2 and 3 are modules and applications
> respectively.
>
> http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/
But these are "programs", not "applications". It's not searchable.
Should it be renamed properly? Or should the PAPT be renamed? I still
can't find the definition of Python Application. From policy it looks
like executable script with a shebang line.
There is inconsistency in policy regarding private modules. Section 2
says that private modules should be installed into
/usr/share/package-name, Section 3 says they should be installed into
/usr/share/module
--
anatoly t.
Reply to: