[arch-general] Several advices about Perl Package Packaging Standards
Hey,guys I have several thoughts about perl packages packing standards. First,It seems to me that renaming spamassassin to perl-mail-spamassassin which following the cpan perl packages naming standard is better.May be we can add a feature to PKGBULD that allowing package have several alias.Ex,perl-mail-spamassassin should be the official name and spamassassin could be the common name or aliase.Both official name and standard name can be installed or qureied using pacman,but official name mostly used in programing and official posts. Second,the URL variable of perl package's PKGBUILD should be restriced to cpan permanent urls (like:http://search.cpan.org/dist/*) even if the project has its own home page,and the cpan will link to the project's real homepage if exits. What do you think?
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:58 AM, 郑文辉 <techlivezheng@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey,guys
I have several thoughts about perl packages packing standards.
First,It seems to me that renaming spamassassin to perl-mail-spamassassin which following the cpan perl packages naming standard is better.May be we can add a feature to PKGBULD that allowing package have several alias.Ex,perl-mail-spamassassin should be the official name and spamassassin could be the common name or aliase.Both official name and standard name can be installed or qureied using pacman,but official name mostly used in programing and official posts.
Spamassassin is used as a daemon, which happens to use perl. If it is not necessarily used as a perl module, why should we rename it into perl-something? Should we rename all c packages into c-* and bash scripts into bash-*?
Second,the URL variable of perl package's PKGBUILD should be restriced to cpan permanent urls (like:http://search.cpan.org/dist/*) even if the project has its own home page,and the cpan will link to the project's real homepage if exits.
And I don't think using CPAN as the package main page URL is a good way if the package upstream has its own page. CPAN is downstream compared to the package's own page. I am not an Arch developer. This is simply my own opinion. Best Regards,
2011/3/9 Auguste Pop <auguste@gmail.com>:
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:58 AM, 郑文辉 <techlivezheng@gmail.com> wrote:
Hey,guys
I have several thoughts about perl packages packing standards.
First,It seems to me that renaming spamassassin to perl-mail-spamassassin which following the cpan perl packages naming standard is better.May be we can add a feature to PKGBULD that allowing package have several alias.Ex,perl-mail-spamassassin should be the official name and spamassassin could be the common name or aliase.Both official name and standard name can be installed or qureied using pacman,but official name mostly used in programing and official posts.
Spamassassin is used as a daemon, which happens to use perl. If it is not necessarily used as a perl module, why should we rename it into perl-something? Should we rename all c packages into c-* and bash scripts into bash-*?
Second,the URL variable of perl package's PKGBUILD should be restriced to cpan permanent urls (like:http://search.cpan.org/dist/*) even if the project has its own home page,and the cpan will link to the project's real homepage if exits.
And I don't think using CPAN as the package main page URL is a good way if the package upstream has its own page. CPAN is downstream compared to the package's own page.
I am not an Arch developer. This is simply my own opinion.
Best Regards,
Auguste, I share your opinion. -1 to that proposal, users of spamassasin doesn't even know that spamassasin is coded on perl . -- Angel Velásquez angvp @ irc.freenode.net Arch Linux Developer / Trusted User Linux Counter: #359909 http://www.angvp.com
2011/3/8 Ángel Velásquez <angvp@archlinux.org>
I share your opinion.
-1 to that proposal, users of spamassasin doesn't even know that spamassasin is coded on perl .
Another -1 from me. If I saw a package called perl-mail-spamassasin, I'd assume it was a library for interfacing with spamassasin from perl code.
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Jeremiah Dodds <jeremiah.dodds@gmail.com> wrote:
I'd assume it was a library for interfacing with spamassasin from perl code.
bingo ... <lang>-<lib/app/*> == binding/interface/bridge/etc/etc ... this is the defacto scheme that extends far beyond cpan. i would have naturally thought the same thing, and been even more confused to learn otherwise. On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 8:58 PM, <techlivezheng@gmail.com> wrote:
even if the project has its own home page,and the cpan will link to the project's real homepage if exits.
i don't understand; why would anything _ever_ trump the projects official page? who the <expletive deleted> is CPAN anyway ;-) disclaimer: i don't know much about the perl community as i only dip into perl when the need arises, but this feels 99.2% wrong to me. C Anthony
participants (5)
-
Auguste Pop
-
C Anthony Risinger
-
Jeremiah Dodds
-
Ángel Velásquez
-
郑文辉