Re: Inconsistency in source package naming for python modules
Another rule of thumb I use is that if a project is not just about python module but also provides some GUI or CUI interface which might be used by users without realizing presence of a python behind I do not prefix with python-, eg psychopy.
Sandro Tosi <morph@debian.org> wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com>
>wrote:
>> 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'm using the same same rule, with just one exception: I'm calling
>source package python-X if X is too generic (see python-psutil, where
>upstream is calling the project psutil, too close to psutils). I don't
>feel there's anything to "fix" here, or to write a policy for source
>package name.
>
>Regards,
>--
>Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu)
>My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/
>Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi
--
Sent from a phone which beats iPhone.
Reply to: