[Drbd-dev] drbdmanage package name

[Drbd-dev] drbdmanage package name

[Dietmar Maurer]

I just saw that you name the package 'python-drbdmanage'.

> Package: python-drbdmanage

Why don't you simply call it 'drbdmanage'?

IMHO, adding 'python' would be OK for a python library, but not 
for a binary package?

Re: [Drbd-dev] drbdmanage package name

[Roland Kammerer]

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 08:44:20AM +0200, Dietmar Maurer wrote:
> I just saw that you name the package 'python-drbdmanage'.
> 
> > Package: python-drbdmanage
> 
> Why don't you simply call it 'drbdmanage'?
> 
> IMHO, adding 'python' would be OK for a python library, but not 
> for a binary package?

AFAIK the initial Debian packaging came from a Debian upstream guy and I
adopted his initial naming convention.

The Debian python packaging guide states:
"Binary packages with public modules should follow python-modulename
naming schema[...].[1]

Currently, it is a "frankenstein-package" anyways, because it contains
the server, the modules which could be used for example to write your
own client, and the client itself...

I will keep it in mind and think about renaming/splitting.

Regards, rck

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Python/Packaging

Re: [Drbd-dev] drbdmanage package name

[Dietmar Maurer]

> Currently, it is a "frankenstein-package" anyways, because it contains
> the server, the modules which could be used for example to write your
> own client, and the client itself...
> 
> I will keep it in mind and think about renaming/splitting.

Yes, I guess you should split the package if it contains a library.
But the package with the binary toolkit should be called 'drbdmanage',
an sections should be 'admin' instead of 'python'.

I also noticed that you do not apply the quilt patches, which is good because 
the included patches are out of date. I suggest to remove patch
0001-var-lib-drbdd.patch from debian/patches/series to avoid confusion.