On 30/04/12 10:39, Piotr Ożarowski wrote: > [Piotr Ożarowski, 2012-04-30] >> I will change that to /usr/share/package-name/module and >> /usr/lib/package-name/module if no one objects >> (adding /usr/share or /usr/lib to sys.path is not a good idea, we don't >> do that so policy should be updated) > > on the second thought, "module" in above path is a directory name > (with final paths: /usr/share/module/module.py or /usr/lib/module/module.so) > so it doesn't need updates, I guess...
I think it would still be clearer to say /usr/share/package-name/module.py, /usr/lib/package-name/module.so, assuming the library-user code involves "import module"? (Or invent an example like Debian package foo containing Python module foolib, which would lead to something like /usr/share/foo/foolib.py, /usr/lib/foo/foolib.so or /usr/share/foo/foolib/__init__.py, or use a real example like virt-manager or guake) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f9e72bc.90...@debian.org
