Hello Jonas, On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 12:45:02PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting Andreas Henriksson (2023-11-26 09:27:32) > > Package: wnpp > > Severity: wishlist > > Owner: Andreas Henriksson <andr...@fatal.se> > > X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-de...@lists.debian.org > > > > * Package name : bankstown > [...] > > Naming > > ------------------- > > Upstream name: bankstown > > crates.io name: bankstown-lv2 > > > > My proposition is that we use the upstream name as debian source name > > (bankstown) and then use `lv2-bankstown` binary package name, as > > bankstown is a lv2 plugin and that would fit generic naming conventions > > in Debian about packages fitting into a particular ecosystem. > > Please consider using "bankstown-lv2" for both source and binary > package, to not needlessly consume multiple global namespaces.
I have been considering, but please help convince me. Pro bankstown-lv2: - not needlessly consume multiple global namespaces. This argument is just saying binary and source name should match, right? - matches crates.io name. - matches what atleast some other lv2 plugins are doing in debian. Cons: - (source) does not match the upstream (git repo) name (bankstown). - does not follow the system-subsystem pattern commonly used in debian. - does not match what other distributions are doing (atleast not Fedora Asahi Remix, which is the reference distribution). It is my opinion that the bankstown name, in any form, is unique enough that noone should need to collide with it. My main worry would be if lv2 itself grew a subsystem called bankstown, which would then be lv2-bankstown as well, but see previous statement about the bankstown uniqueness. For me the strongest pro argument is probably that other lv2 plugins in debian seems to point to the pluginname-lv2 pattern, but not really enough to completely convince me (atleast not for source name). For the source name, if we're going to mangle it maybe I should atleast there follow fedora naming of `rust-bankstown-lv2` which would also align with the Debian rust-team naming convention? I really would like to avoid mangling source name though... Regards, Andreas Henriksson
