From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2015 12:59:25 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] Package naming convention [was: Re: [PATCH 1/2] scanpypi: new utility] In-Reply-To: <55A66B64.5090603@mind.be> References: <916572081.3104684.1436969298786.JavaMail.root@openwide.fr> <55A66B64.5090603@mind.be> Message-ID: <20150808125925.66e32bfb@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear Arnout Vandecappelle, On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 16:17:08 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote: > Good question, we indeed have no real convention of what the buildroot name is > for packages with weird characters. > > Actually, we do: keep the upstream name as much as possible. So python-webpy, > for instance, keeps the upstream webpy name (note that the upstream name is > webpy, even though the package is identified in PyPI as web.py. PyPI isn't very > consistent either). For zope.interface, I actually see no reason not to keep the > upstream name, so the package really should have been called > python-zope.interface IMHO. > > What do the others think? I missed this message. On my side, I would prefer to not have a package named python-zope.interface. It should be named python-zope-interface instead. I.e all weird characters should be replaced by '-' in package names. Thanks, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com