I am in the process of packaging python-pyinstaller.what
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1084906
Currently my source package is named python-pyinstaller. It produces two binary packages:
pyinstaller - installs executables to /usr/bin
python3-pyinstaller - installs Python modules to /usr/lib/python3/dist-packages
I have been following the discussion about package names and have started to wonder if pyinstaller wouldn’t be a better source package name. That is
it is called upstream, and the “py” prefix already indicates it is related to
Python.
Beyond that, I was wondering if it wouldn’t be better to only provide one binary file. I don’t know if there is any value to the Python modules without the executables in /usr/bin. Is there any policy or best practice that says this should be split into two binary packages?
Soren
P.S. I figured I would ask now as it is easy to make changes before the first
upload.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 489 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 43:01:00 |
Calls: | 9,670 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 13,716 |
Messages: | 6,169,853 |