From owner-freebsd-python@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 5 19:29:44 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: python@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DB9D1065675 for ; Sat, 5 Mar 2011 19:29:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pav@FreeBSD.org) Received: from raven.customer.vol.cz (raven.customer.vol.cz [195.250.144.108]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F7C58FC1B for ; Sat, 5 Mar 2011 19:29:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.23] (ip-62-245-117-217.net.upcbroadband.cz [62.245.117.217]) (authenticated bits=0) by raven.customer.vol.cz (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p25J2atH001737; Sat, 5 Mar 2011 20:02:38 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from pav@FreeBSD.org) From: Pav Lucistnik To: Li-Wen Hsu In-Reply-To: <20110304171315.GA32391@FreeBSD.cs.nctu.edu.tw> References: <20110304171315.GA32391@FreeBSD.cs.nctu.edu.tw> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-HIpOMAIQdDLoVCg0Ev9C" Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 20:02:36 +0100 Message-ID: <1299351756.34652.0.camel@hood.oook.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 195.250.144.108 X-Milter: Spamilter (Reciever: raven.customer.vol.cz; Sender-ip: 62.245.117.217; Sender-helo: [192.168.0.23]; ) Cc: python@FreeBSD.org, portmgr@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Fwd: What's the perfered name for zope related modules? X-BeenThere: freebsd-python@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: pav@FreeBSD.org List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Python issues List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 19:29:44 -0000 --=-HIpOMAIQdDLoVCg0Ev9C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I don't have a strong opinion but I'd go with the option no.2 Li-Wen Hsu p=ED=B9e v so 05. 03. 2011 v 01:13 +0800: > Since there is no feedback (to my question) on freebsd-python list (CC'd)= , > I would like to listen the opinion from portmgr about the best naming of > these ports, perhaps we need a regexp about "valid package name" in the > porter's handbook? >=20 > Regards, > Li-Wen >=20 > ----- Forwarded message from Li-Wen Hsu ----- >=20 > Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 18:50:45 +0800 > From: Li-Wen Hsu > To: python@freebsd.org > Subject: What's the perfered name for zope related modules? > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) >=20 > Hello all, >=20 > I'm working on www/py-pyramid port, which needs some other zope ports to > be added. And I found we have following naming in the tree: >=20 > - py-zopeInterface > - py-zope.exceptions > - py-zopetesting >=20 > From [1], first one is not suggested, though we have many in the tree. > And I am not sure '.' would affect the other parts, but if it does, > it should already caused problem since we have also ports like > openoffice.org php-mode.el in tree. If not, I like second one because > third one could cause other naming conflicts. >=20 > Regards, > Li-Wen >=20 > [1] http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/makefile-naming.= html#PORTING-PKGNAME >=20 > --=20 > Li-Wen Hsu > http://lwhsu.org >=20 >=20 >=20 > ----- End forwarded message ----- >=20 --=20 --=20 Pav Lucistnik Stupidity got us into this mess -- why can't it get us out? --=-HIpOMAIQdDLoVCg0Ev9C Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAk1yiMgACgkQntdYP8FOsoJQqACfdzz1X/LbYxwRJKm3HVsiXlor 1qkAniN6PVR60dnXANuJd7Z1GlNRjLCF =LYW5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-HIpOMAIQdDLoVCg0Ev9C--