Re: Inconsistency in source package naming for python modules
On Monday, July 08, 2013 09:59:02 PM Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Over the last months, I've seen lots of inconsistency in the source
> package naming scheme in the python module maintained in the team.
> Sometimes, module X will have its source package called python-X or just X.
>
> If we have a python module named X, then IMO, we should stick to call
> the source package python-X, and not just X. Why? Because AFAICT it
> seems that there's a consensus in Debian that, if a package is producing
> a single binary, then its source package should have the same name.
>
> It isn't my intention to fix mistakes already made (IMO, too much work
> for not enough rewards), but I wanted to raise this topic to check if
> others have the same opinion, and to make sure we have this in the
> python policy (in one way or the other). Thoughts anyone?
There is no policy on this either way, so there's no "mistake". Personally, I
tend to use the upstream name for the source package name and
python-$modulename (per Python policy) for the binary. I think this is quite
reasonable and would be against anything that made it somehow wrong.
Scott K
Reply to: