Re: Naming convention for -doc package

2017-02-15 Thread Christopher Hoskin
Currently lintian is applying the new-package-should-not-package-python2-module tag to documentation packages as well. I've filed a bug report with a patch: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=855243 Christopher Hoskin On 11 February 2017 at 01:51, Ben Finney

Re: Naming convention for -doc package

2017-02-10 Thread Ben Finney
Ghislain Vaillant writes: > So given your criteria above, you would choose: > > - python3-pytestqt > - python-pytestqt-doc > > Am I correct? That allows a future ‘python4-pytestqt’ to use the same documentation. So far, the overwhelming pattern is that upstream's

Re: Re: Naming convention for -doc package

2017-02-10 Thread Ghislain Vaillant
[Piotr Ożarowski] > > For instance, I have a source package (pytest-qt) which builds a Python > > 3 binary package and its corresponding documentation. Right now, they > > are respectively named python3-pytest-qt and pytest-qt-doc. > > I'd use python-modulename-doc even for new packages that

Re: Naming convention for -doc package

2017-02-10 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 4:33 AM, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > So based on #829744, both pytest-qt and > pytest-xvfb, which are new packages, do not produce a corresponding > Python 2 binary package. my point is: this looks wrong and premature, and should have been discussed

Re: Naming convention for -doc package

2017-02-10 Thread Ghislain Vaillant
On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 18:58 -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 16:51 -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Ghislain Vaillant > > > wrote: > > > > Now

Re: Naming convention for -doc package

2017-02-10 Thread Piotr Ożarowski
> For instance, I have a source package (pytest-qt) which builds a Python > 3 binary package and its corresponding documentation. Right now, they > are respectively named python3-pytest-qt and pytest-qt-doc. I'd use python-modulename-doc even for new packages that provide python3-modulename

Re: Naming convention for -doc package

2017-02-09 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 16:51 -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: >> > Now that new packages are targeting the Buster cycle, and that Python 2 >> >

Re: Naming convention for -doc package

2017-02-09 Thread Ghislain Vaillant
On Thu, 2017-02-09 at 16:51 -0500, Sandro Tosi wrote: > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > > Now that new packages are targeting the Buster cycle, and that Python 2 > > packages should no longer be built, > > this is news to me, can you point me to

Re: Naming convention for -doc package

2017-02-09 Thread Sandro Tosi
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > Now that new packages are targeting the Buster cycle, and that Python 2 > packages should no longer be built, this is news to me, can you point me to where this was announced? -- Sandro "morph" Tosi My website:

Naming convention for -doc package

2017-02-09 Thread Ghislain Vaillant
Just to get the opinion from the team, Now that new packages are targeting the Buster cycle, and that Python 2 packages should no longer be built, how should the corresponding -doc packages be named? For instance, I have a source package (pytest-qt) which builds a Python 3 binary package and its