Package: lintian Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Dear Lintian maintainers, The correspondance between source and binary package names has been discussed on the debian-devel mailing list recently. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/02/msg00622.html In particular, it has been proposed that, for source package producing a single binary package, their names should be the same, and follow a naming scheme that prevents possible clash with unrelated packages using the same name upstream. Pros and cons have been reminded or identified in this discussion, and I would like them to be easy to find for refreshing our memories in the future. Policy, DEP and lintian have been proposed as a vector, and my conclusion is that, for some subsets of packages, lintian is a good place. To start, I propose the following new lintian tag, to be applied on packages in the gnu-r section and any other sections for which there is a consensus. Improvements on the wording are much welcome. source-and-binary-package-names-do-not-match Source packages in the gnu-r section that produce only one binary package should use the same name. This rule guarantees that there will be no name conflict even if the upstream names are generic and used in unrelated projects. It also prevents having unrelated source and a binary packages with the same name in the Debian archive. Severity: normal, Certainty: certain You may have noted that there is no patch attached... While, if there is agreement to create this new tag, I will try to implement it, everybody is most welcome to be faster than me on this. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120217011902.ga31...@falafel.plessy.net