[aur-general] Package naming: <proglang>-<name> or <name>

[Mateusz Loskot]

On 26 March 2013 08:21, Ike Devolder <ike.devolder at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 09:52:40PM +0000, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
>>
>> I can't find anything in the AUR guidelines article about
>> recommended naming convention for packages.
>> Apart, from the brief paragraph here
>> https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Packaging_Standards#Package_naming
>>
>> I stumbled upon two packages that make me wonder about that:
>>
>> 1) https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/gist-git/
>> installs straight from repo and, by convention, uses -git suffix
>>
>> 2) https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/ruby-jist/
>> installs from Ruby gem
>>
>> Am I right the latter should be named just jist
>> and jist-git for version of the package installing form git?
>>
>> Or, is the ruby- prefix recommended here?
>> Or, the former should  be actually named ruby-gist-git?
>>
>> There is another one, same kind of tool but implemented in Python:
>>
>> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/pygist-git/
>>
>> What, if any, is the naming policy in such cases?
>>
>> I sense, it those packages should be named after software
>> they provide:
>>
>> https://github.com/defunkt/gist -> gist and gist-git
>> https://github.com/ConradIrwin/jist -> jist and jist-git
>> https://github.com/mattikus/pygist -> pygist and pygist-git
>>
>> Their implementation language is displayed in dependencies.
>
> normally we have a convention about libs:
>
> example: python2-yenc (this is not a standalone app but a lib that might
> be needed for apps)

Right, that makes perfect sense.

> in the case of an application, for example depending on python2 the
> recommended way of packaging is just use the application name.
>
> example sabnzbd (depends on python2, is written in python but is an
> application, not a lib)
>
> so i would say your naming scheme is correct.

Thanks, I'll suggest to rename ruby-jist to jist.

Best regards,
--
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net