On May 15, 2014, at 11:38 PM, Scott Kitterman wrote: >Shouldn't it be singular? Each package provides a wheel, not several wheels >(and I'd name the location the same for consistency).
I thought about this. True, in all current cases there's a single wheel file in the binary package. I wanted to leave open the possibility that a binary package could contain multiple wheels, but I agree that's a weak argument given the scope we're trying to limit here. Two mild reasons I went with plurals in the package name: I think the directory where these get laid down on the file system *should* be plural, since it *will* hold multiple wheels, and I wanted the binary package name to reflect that. Also, since we now have python-wheel and python3-wheel packages, which contain the PyPI wheel package, I thought it was confusing to name the built-wheel packages with the same suffix. E.g. python-wheel and python-urllib3-wheel would by naming appear to have a relationship that they actually don't have. It seemed clearer that the latter would be called python-urllib3-wheels. It's bikeshedding, but anyway that was my rationale for choosing the names I did. Cheers, -Barry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140516101703.6c95d...@anarchist.wooz.org
