On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 18:38:14 +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 12:40:45PM +0100, Tom Parkin wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 15:17:11 +0530, Nilesh Patra wrote: > Primary usecase is what defined the source package name. If it is > supposed to be mainly a library, then the naming should be > golang-github-foo, and foo otherwise. If it should be used as a library, > the "source package" name also needs to be changed. Thanks for clarifying and ack on the required fixups. > > I'm not sure what to do for the best here. > > I mean, upto you. It'd probably make sense to think of what is the major > component, or what people are more interested in consuming. If it's an > application then I'll just rename it on salsa. Otherwise it needs other > fixes as I stated above. Understood. I think on balance it probably makes sense to use the library naming convention. Although the current driver for Debian packaging is making it easier for users of nm-l2tp to use kl2tpd, the fact remains that go-l2tp as a whole is a library. So choosing the library package name will hopefully make things easier in the future if/when another project has go-l2tp as a dependency. > Ping on the list and maybe CC me when you're done. I'm a Debian > Developer and can help with sponsoring. Smashing, thank you -- much appreciated. All the best, Tom
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature