On 2015-04-06 11:00 -0600 John D Jones III wrote: >There are some perl modules, like Perl::Critic that are packaged as >perl-critic in AUR. I am the maintainer for a number of these modules >and I'd like some clarity. It seems a bit redundant to have a pkgbuild >named: >perl-perl-critic >and cpan2aur actually filters this particular module's name and >truncates it to perl-critic. I personally only have 2 redundantly named >modules, but there's another user who is adding modules that have >existed as perl-$name for years as perl-perl-$name. To set an example, >take the gtk2 module in Extra or glade-perl. These in CPAN are just Gtk2 >or Glade respectively, Some utils are known simply by the executable >used, it's perltidy or perlcritic. People searching AUR etc for these >modules shouldn't have to deal with perl-perl-tidy perl-perl-critic when >the accepted program names are perl-tidy perl-critic etc. >If I'm wrong here, then by all means, let the flame begin, but if it's >agreed that I am correct here, let us update the wiki article to reflect >the exceptions to the perl-$fulldistname statement found: >https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Perl_package_guidelines >and let us merge the rogue pkgbuilds into the proper locations. >It just seems unnecessarily redundant having perl modules with the name >perl in the CPAN module name to have perl-perl- in the AUR.
I'm in favor of very minor user inconvenience (typing "perl-") if it leaves the package ecosystem systematically(/programmatically) consistent. The "redundancy" permits a direct translation of CPAN module names to package names without having to handle exceptions. It also avoids possible name collisions in the future, e.g. Perl::Foo and Foo. Keep in mind as well that while it is trivial to convert a CPAN name to Pacman name without the redundancy (simple check for "perl-perl-"), the other way becomes more complicated if you have to query CPAN for "Foo" and "Perl::Foo" given a list of pacman package names. I really don't want to introduce exceptions to a global rule just to remove 5 characters from a handful of package names. It isn't justifiable technically imo. Regards, Xyne
