[Buildroot] [PATCH 13/25] package/Config.in: explain that lua package names should start with lua

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 02-03-17 23:22, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 23:19:50 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
> 
>>  The problem is that we want to use upstream names. The upstream name of
>> luaposix is luaposix. We certainly don't want to change that into lua-posix, and
>> making it lua-luaposix would be weird as well. Note that Debian does call it
>> lua-posix. So to use the lua-posix package, you have to do 'require "luaposix"',
>> which makes little sense IMHO.
>>
>>  For me, the important thing is that I can see in the package directory which
>> packages are lua-related. I'm not really bothered with seeing a mix of lua-foo
>> and luabar.
>>
>>  Perl is different because module names (almost?) never start with Perl. Python
>> is different because package names sometimes are like pyfoo, but never
>> python-foo, and we have indeed chosen to make it python-pyfoo.
>>
>>  If people think it would be better for consistency to have lua-luafoo, I can
>> live with that (just 3 letters more). But do keep in mind that we have already
>> forsaken consistency because of the historical discrepancy.
> 
> Fair enough, but then I'd like that the rule be:
> 
>  * If the upstream package name is luafoo, then it should be luafoo in
>    Buildroot.
> 
>  * If the upstream package name is foo, then it should be lua-foo in
>    Buildroot.
> 
> Does that sound OK?

 That's exactly what I meant. Should I update the Config.in?

 Regards,
 Arnout

-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                          arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect            +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind                                http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium           BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF