On 28.03.20 12:22, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Sat, 28 Mar 2020 at 11:44:35 +0100, ghisv...@gmail.com wrote: >> I believe it should remain python- (as the programming language), >> instead of python3- (the major version targeted). > > In cases where the documentation is large enough to justify a separate > binary package, this matches my understanding of the policy. If/when there > is eventually a Python 4, I think we would want the module that is used > via "import tpot" to ship python3-tpot, python4-tpot and python-tpot-doc > binary packages; it would seem odd for the documentation for python4-tpot > to be in python3-tpot-doc. Indeed, I can see that now.
> Unfortunately https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/ > doesn't say anything either way on this. I think it should, and I'll open > a bug with a reference to the proposed patch in > <https://salsa.debian.org/cpython-team/python3-defaults/-/merge_requests/4>. Thanks!
