[aur-general] Package Guidelines: Naming of Apache mods
xyne at archlinux.ca
Mon Jun 27 08:52:06 EDT 2011
Phillip Smith wrote:
> Hi all,
> My Google-fu has turned up nothing on this this. Is there a preferred
> standard for naming packages of Apache mods? I see everything in [extra] is
> just "mod_name" but some AUR packages are "apache-mod_name"
> Personally I prefer the "apache-mod_name" form, but I take the format of
> [extra] to be the official word? It doesn't seem to have been discussed
> before (as best I can find in my searching) so thought I would raise it.
> I have packages in AUR using both formats and I want to bring them in line
> with "the right way", whichever that is ;)
I'm not aware of any official recommendation. I prefer "apache-mod_name"
because it's consistent with other recommended module naming schemes. In the
absence of a better argument I recommend that you go with that.
I wouldn't place too much weight on the naming scheme in [extra]. There are many
examples of packages in the official repos that clearly break conventions.
More information about the aur-general