On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:11:53AM +0100, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > Indeed the policy is explicit about the naming convention of the binary > packages, but I could not find anything regarding the naming convention > for the corresponding source package. > > I recently suggested adopting the same naming convention in Bug#819157: > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=819157 > > But the OP justified not taking action by mentioning the lack of > consistency in that regard for modules maintained by the DPMT. > > Do you think it is a deficiency in the current policy then?
I do think so.
I can accept having the source named with only the module name, but imho
python-$module is better as it provides namespacing also between the
source package names.
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
more about me: http://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
