module package naming

2007-03-21 Thread Thomas Jollans
Hi, the debian python policy states that module packages should be named python-foo, foo being the module name. I intend to package PySyck, which contains the module/package 'syck', which is also in python-syck (AFAICT PySyck is basically a fork of the upstream bindings). Would python-pysyck

Re: module package naming

2007-03-21 Thread Pierre Habouzit
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 08:46:35PM +0100, Thomas Jollans wrote: Hi, the debian python policy states that module packages should be named python-foo, foo being the module name. I intend to package PySyck, which contains the module/package 'syck', which is also in python-syck (AFAICT

Re: module package naming

2007-03-21 Thread Thomas Jollans
On Wednesday 21 March 2007 23:26, Pierre Habouzit wrote: On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 08:46:35PM +0100, Thomas Jollans wrote: Hi, the debian python policy states that module packages should be named python-foo, foo being the module name. I intend to package PySyck, which contains the

Re: module package naming

2007-03-21 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le jeudi 22 mars 2007 à 00:06 +0100, Thomas Jollans a écrit : There is also the option of only having one in the distribution, which should be PySyck for having more features. This would mean chucking the official binding out of debian, which I am not entirely comfortable with either. If it