On Tuesday, August 05, 2014 11:54:37 Ben Finney wrote: > Vincent Cheng <vch...@debian.org> writes: > > […] just don't pick a source package name that's already taken, and > > pick one that is relevant to your package […] > > I further advise: Try to avoid names which are too broad (e.g. > “coverage” for a Python-specific code coverage package), or names which > can easily be anticipated to conflict in future. > > These are both judgements you'll need to make on expertise and a > perspective beyond only Python and Debian; they are (and IMO should) > based not in fixed rules, but principles.
True. One other consideration ... In cases where the upstream name doesn't match the policy name for the binary, I tend to use the upstream name for the source package. As an example, For PyQt5 (upstream name whose module name is PyQt5), I used pyqt5 for the source and the primary binary is python3-pyqt5. Scott K -- 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/2066737.YlUxVSkVCy@scott-latitude-e6320
