Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 06:50:04 -0800 (PST) From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/23326: New port: misc/pybliograher Message-ID: <200012061450.eB6Eo4T50017@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR ports/23326; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <n@nectar.com> To: Johann Visagie <johann@egenetics.com> Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, tg@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/23326: New port: misc/pybliograher Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 08:46:00 -0600 On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 04:36:11PM +0200, Johann Visagie wrote: > Looking through the ports tree, the very unofficial standard for Python ports > *seems* to be to use the py- prefix for ports which install Python modules > (libraries, packages), whereas standaone applications which just happen to be > written in Python don't have the prefix. (gadfly, glimmer, sketch, pmail, > mailman, grail, pygmy, zope(!), etc., etc.) > > I've checked this before with tg (who maintains the Python port itself) and > he concurred. Yes, that is absolutely correct. It was a convention which I came up with in the first place some 2.5 years ago :-) > That said, I agree that the boundary between a module and an application may > be fuzzy (esp. where Python is concerned), so I'm willing to accept guidance > in this... :-) Well perhaps not from me -- I was wrong :-) For some reason I thought pybliographer was a module rather than an application *shrugs* Probably has to do with the fact that I was only half-way through my first cup of coffee. -- Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200012061450.eB6Eo4T50017>