Hi Guillem (2024.10.18_13:31:26_+0000) > > IMO source package names should follow upstream as closely as possible > > If Debian only contained python packages, that would make sense, > because python modules upstream need to care about not stomping over > each others names. But Debian contains source packages for multitude of > projects and language ecosystems, where their own modules can and do > share the same short and generic or conflicting module names with many > other language ecosystems modules (say json modules). These also can > conflict with command-line tools which use another common namespace, etc. > > Pretty much every other language specific team in Debian namespaces > their _source_ and _binary_ packages to avoid stomping/grabbing on > the global namespace. I don't really understand what makes python > special here, that it cannot follow a similar pattern. :/
It's worth drawing a distinction between libraries and apps here. I think it would be silly to namespace application source packages that are already installing a binary of that name. The fact that they are implemented in Python is hardly relevant. It's easier for everyone when the source and binary package names are the same, and match upstream's name. In general, namespacing libraries makes sense. Either with python- or whatever ecosystem they are part of. Stefano -- Stefano Rivera http://tumbleweed.org.za/ +1 415 683 3272
