Re: Where to put docs of a -doc package for python 2 + 3 modules?

On 03/13/2018 10:11 AM, Ole Streicher wrote: > and makes it harder for external people to find the package. I don't see how. A query to https://packages.debian.org/foo will also show python-foo, and same with apt-cache search. So how is it harder? Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Re: Certbot DNS Dependencies

Hi Harlan, On Sun, Mar 11, 2018, at 8:43 PM, Harlan Lieberman-Berg wrote: > I took a look; thanks for the update. Can you move the publicsuffix > local URL to the top of the list? Based on its current position, it > will (essentially) never be used.Ok, changed and uploaded. > > I also created

Re: Where to put docs of a -doc package for python 2 + 3 modules?

Thomas Goirand writes: > On 03/13/2018 12:29 AM, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: >> Imo, we should just make it clear in policy that source packages >> should be named `foo` or `python-foo`, >> and corresponding doc packages should be named `foo-doc` or `python-foo-doc`. > > Very often,

Re: Where to put docs of a -doc package for python 2 + 3 modules?

Quoting Thomas Goirand : Which is why I think we should have standardize on python-foo for the source package (which is what I do). Same here, even if foo is not yet taken. Save the environment, do not pollute the global packages namespace! :~)

Re: Where to put docs of a -doc package for python 2 + 3 modules?

Ghislain Vaillant writes: > Definitely [do not name the documentation package ‘python3-foo-doc’], > indeed. The python- prefixes in python-foo and python-foo-doc are not > exactly equivalent. The former usage refers to the Python 2 > interpreter, the latter refers to Python