Public bug reported:
Binary package hint: python-rackspace-cloudservers
Shortly before Lucid was released, bug 563434 was filed, asking for this
package to be renamed from python-cloudservers to python-rackspace-
cloudservers. This is troublesome for a number of reasons:
Debian Python Policy section 2.2 says: "The binary package for module
foo should preferably be named python-foo, if the module name allows,
but this is not required if the binary package ships multiple modules.".
This package provides a module named "cloudservers" (and no other
modules), so per policy the correct name for this package is python-
cloudservers.
My sponsor in Debian (Piotr Ożarowski) said he might have accepted a
change to call the binary package "python-cloudservers-rackspace", but
not "python-rackspace-cloudservers". Thinking this through (more so than
I did when I was originally presented with bug 563434) I think his
opinion on this subject is perfectly reasonable.
As for the source package name, upstream called their package "python-
cloudservers". This may not be popular, but nevertheless, that is the
name it was given. As such, calling the source package anything other
than "python-cloudservers" seems very wrong to me (regardless of what we
call the binary package). Not only is it wrong, but it makes it
exceedingly annoying to maintain the package. It cannot be autosynced,
MoM will give it no love, and the bzr branches for the two source
packages will not (I think) detect their common ancestry.
In short, I'd like to suggest that the source package is renamed to
python-cloudservers and ideally the binary as well (to follow policy).
** Affects: python-rackspace-cloudservers (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
Package rename creates hassle for maintainers
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/582239
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
