Bug#605670: ITP: atd -- Syntax for cross-language data types in OCaml

[Sylvain Le Gall <gildor@debian.org>]

Hello,

On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 01:20:24PM +0100, Agustin Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 11:56:11AM +0100, Sylvain Le Gall wrote:
> > Package: wnpp
> > Severity: wishlist
> > Owner: Sylvain Le Gall <gildor@debian.org>
> > 
> > 
> > * Package name    : atd
> >   Version         : 0.9.2
> >   Upstream Author : Martin Jambon
> > * URL             : http://oss.wink.com/atd/
> > * License         : BSD3
> >   Programming Lang: OCaml
> >   Description     : Syntax for cross-language data types in OCaml
> > 
> > ATD stands for Adjustable Type Definitions. It is a type definition
> > language designed to accomodate a variety of programming languages and
> > data formats by the means of target-specific annotations. It supports
> > sum types, parametrized types and inheritance. The library provides a
> > parser and other tools useful for manipulating ATD type definitions.
> > The reference manual gives a complete description of the syntax. 
> 
> One minor thing here,
> 
> I do not know if there is a specfic OCaml policy in Debian, but would not 
> be better to name this kind of packages ocaml-*? atd seems to short and 
> there is a potential for namespace conflicts and confusion that would be 
> avoided with something like 'ocaml-atd'. That would also help when 
> browsing with package managers.
> 
> Same applies to other OCaml packages in the same ITP run.
> 

Indeed, there is an implicit policy about the name of __source__ package,
about that. I checked and there is no debian source package/well known
software named atd/atdgen/biniou/yojson/cppo. 

You will notice that I applied the implicit policy for other source
package: inifiles -> ocaml-inifiles and deriving -> ocaml-deriving. 

Concerning binary packages (after all this is the end-user interface),
there should be no problem, because we use a (policy-)defined naming
scheme: libatd-ocaml-dev, libatdgen-ocaml-dev...

Cheers
Sylvain Le Gall