On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 00:58:12 -0200, Martín Ferrari wrote:
On Jan 2, 2008 12:28 AM, Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a Policy proposal that's sat in the Policy bug queue with wording
and seconds for quite some time. I'd like to resurrect it and resolve it
one way or the other.
Packages which contain perl modules should provide virtual packages
that correspond to the primary module or modules in the package. The
naming convention is that for module 'Foo::Bar', the package should
provide 'libfoo-bar-perl'. This may be used as the package's name if
Russ Allbery wrote:
This is a Policy proposal that's sat in the Policy bug queue with
wording and seconds for quite some time. I'd like to resurrect it and
resolve it one way or the other.
There's some room for clarification here.
I think it is apparent from comments given in 2001 the that
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008, Julian Mehnle wrote:
I think that from the final sentence it can be inferred that it primarily
intends to mandate the _binary_ package name. So while we're discussing
the binary package naming, maybe we can decide whether the mandate should
be extended to the _source_
Don Armstrong wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008, Julian Mehnle wrote:
I think that from the final sentence it can be inferred that it
primarily intends to mandate the _binary_ package name. So while
we're discussing the binary package naming, maybe we can decide
whether the mandate should be
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 03:46:02PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008, Julian Mehnle wrote:
I think that from the final sentence it can be inferred that it primarily
intends to mandate the _binary_ package name. So while we're discussing
the binary package naming, maybe we
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 03:46:02PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote:
Unless there's a compelling reason to the contrary, a source
package should in general build at least one binary package of the
same name. This is definetly the case when the source
On Thu, 03 Jan 2008, Julian Mehnle wrote:
According to a simple survey of the packages in Lenny/amd64 (main,
contrib, non-free), 2365 of the 11757 source packages (20%!) have no
binary package of the same name. 814 of these (7% of all) have only
a single binary package. Wanna mass-file bugs?
This is a Policy proposal that's sat in the Policy bug queue with wording
and seconds for quite some time. I'd like to resurrect it and resolve it
one way or the other.
Since this is a change to the Perl packaging policy, specifically for Perl
modules, I'm cc'ing the debian-perl list, as the
Hi,
On Jan 2, 2008 12:28 AM, Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a Policy proposal that's sat in the Policy bug queue with wording
and seconds for quite some time. I'd like to resurrect it and resolve it
one way or the other.
I think the proposal is a good technical solution to the
10 matches
Mail list logo
