Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Scott Kitterman Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: on the lack of a `python-` prefix for source packages Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 03:00:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Mon Dec 12 01:53:55 2022 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.2 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -5.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/20580 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/7B430D0B-5BEF-46E2-B1B1-75BC043B20A0@kitterman.com Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 40 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 01:53:05 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <7B430D0B-5BEF-46E2-B1B1-75BC043B20A0@kitterman.com> X-Original-References: Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:14714 On December 12, 2022 1:24:35 AM UTC, Sandro Tosi wrot= e: >Proposal: the DPT will start adding a `python-` prefix to NEW source >packages names, unless the upstream project already contains it > >AFAICT all other major languages ecosystems packaging teams use a >(semi?)mandatory tag to identify their source packages (results below >from a very quick look at Sources, top results only): > >prefix: golang, rust, r, node, ruby, haskell, php, ocaml, python (on a >voluntary basis), and others >prefix+suffix: perl > >At the beginning, I remember being in favor of the current status quo >in DPT, where each maintainer can choose to add `python-` if they feel >like it, or just use the upstream name=2E > >Thru the years, i've grown more uncomfortable with this situation and >i think the fact we dont mandate a `python` prefix in the team source >packages names (and thus guiding the rest of the python packagers >within Debian towards a common style) is detrimental to Debian as a >whole, and we should change it=2E > >My proposal as stated at the top is to start from now on to prepend >`python` to all NEW source packages in DPT, with the option to rename >existing packages at a later date=2E > >What are other team members' opinions on this? For packages that on contain a python module/extension, I think it's not h= orrible, but I don't see why it's better to diverge from upstream naming=2E For packages that contain or are primarily applications, I don't think it'= s a good idea=2E What problem are you trying to solve? Scott K