On 28.03.20 16:11, Sean Whitton wrote: >> While I figure this out with upstream (which may take time), would it be >> OK if I upload a +dfsg2 with the logo removed? It's anything but vital >> to the doc package. > > Certainly.
Great! I just uploaded +dfsg2, with the logo removed. >>> - is the doc binary package name correct? I would have expected to >>> see tpot-doc. >> >> It's a common pattern for Python module doc packages to be named after >> the binary module package, eg: >> * src:scipy -> python3-scipy, python-scipy-doc >> * src:numpy -> python3-numpy, python-numpy-doc >> >> $ apt-cache search 'python-.*-doc' | wc -l >> 652 >> >> I found the practice of keeping the python- prefix for the -doc package >> odd (instead of switching to python3-), but I the Python2 removal page >> [1] states that a rename should not happen. >> >> However, as I just realized, this is not a rename, but a new upload. >> I'll ask debian-python, just to be sure. >> >> [1] https://wiki.debian.org/Python/2Removal > > I'm happy to take your word for it -- just wanted to ask :) In any case, the answers were interesting, and the python- prefix now makes more sense to me. https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/2020/03/msg00073.html -- debian-science-maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-science-maintainers
