Yaroslav Halchenko <deb...@onerussian.com> wrote:
> >On Tue, 12 Jun 2012, Denis Laxalde wrote: >> >>Policy-compliant package name would be "python-numpydoc", but that >> >>could be easily confused with "python-numpy-doc". So I agree with >> >>your assessment: "python-numpydoc-sphinx" is a better for the >binary >> >>package. > >> >if it wouldn't be "convention compliant" anyways -- may be >> >python-sphinx-numpydoc? there is already python-sphinx-issuetracker >... > >> But the namespace is numpydoc not sphinx, so it's even more >> confusing, isn't it? > >that was just my .1 cents ;) yes, probably having namespace first with >some kind of qualifier (-sphinx) is more logical. I just wondered if >we >could reach some unification for 'python-sphinx' related packages. > >ah -- we also have > >python-repoze.sphinx.autointerface > >providing /usr/share/pyshared/repoze/sphinx/autointerface.py Python policy wise that's the correct name for the package. Scott K -- 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/08bd59be-661c-4a00-b347-dd16033a1...@email.android.com
