On Tuesday, July 30, 2013 16:15:58 Brian May wrote: > On 30 July 2013 15:52, Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> wrote: > > The package name is incorrect. Per the python policy, the binary name > > should > > be python-ajax-select. That's the module name. > > Really? I thought it was based on the package name. So I guess this means I > got my other package, already uploaded to Debian, wrong: > python-django-filter instead of python-django-filters :-(. > > > Oh wait, I see it now in the policy. I had to reread it several times. > > "The binary package for module foo should preferably be named python-foo, > if the module name allows, but this is not required if the binary package > ships multiple modules. In the latter case the maintainer chooses the name > of the module which represents the package the most." > > However the word "preferably" suggests this is optional.
In a sense, the entire Python policy is "optional". It's not project policy and failing to follow it isn't an RC bug. In this case though I read it as should be named python-foo unless you are shipping multiple modules. Since this package only has one, the unless doesn't apply. 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/1924658.nEmgszrtp3@scott-latitude-e6320
