Python package naming guidelines

[Timothy Selivanow]

On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 16:21 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

> Other than that, bit... python libs and python lib ports should both be 
> prefixed with python-.  A python framework should be prefixed with 
> python- as well but the definition of framework is a bit ambiguous: zope 
> can run standalone and therefore could be considered an application 
> while TurboGears cannot run until someone creates an application that 
> imports it, therefore it should definitely have been named 
> python-turbogears.

So, under that logic, I should have named pysvn python-pysvn?  That
seems a bit redundant to me, but I'm willing to play along if that is
the consensus.  From now on, I'll make an effort to name things that
way, unless I hear a better reason not to (name space pollution,
lib-{package} naming in other distros, other historical reason that I'm
not aware of or privy to...).

If this is The Way, it should be updated on the wiki so other (future)
maintainers can avoid the ambiguity.  Yes, I've volunteered to make the
change (or propose it to Packaging Committee) as long as there is
sufficient consensus, or however the Python SIG is making decisions.
That is unless someone with more tenure would be more applicable in this
case.


--Tim
 _____________________________________________________________________________ 
< "But what we need to know is, do people want nasally-insertable computers?" >
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
  \
   \   \
        \ /\
        ( )
      .( o ).