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)
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
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, "foo" is already
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! :~)
Le mardi 13 mars 2018 à 09:18 +0100, Thomas Goirand a écrit :
> 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
> > `pytho
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, "foo" is already taken by another package, and we
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 *the language*.
Yes,
7 matches
Mail list logo
