[Slackbuilds-users] any policies for python slack packages' naming standardization?

[LukenShiro]

domenica 11 novembre 2007, Rich Shepard ha scritto:
> > Do you think it could be a best practice to rename a package in
> > order to have a recognizable reference to python
>    It might be helpful to specify the python version used to build
> the package, too.

As far as I know all python packages are installed using current (12.0) 
python interpreter only (python-2.5.1), so maybe it should be implied.

Slackbuilds.org (and the maintainers) do not provide support for 
previous slackware distributions (but normally it's simply a matter of 
a little script's adjustment: for 11.0 
e.g. /usr/lib/python2.5/... -> /usr/lib/python2.4/...
and only if there aren't automated installation script in 
source .tar.gz)

Fortunately, unlike debian and ubuntu, we don't have a coexistence among 
python-2.3, python-2.4, python-2.5 binaries/libraries in a single 
distribution, so necessity to have python2.4-yaddayadda, 
python2.5-blahblah and python2.3-whatever should not exist.
But it could probably be a problem during a new slackware version 
upgrading phase (12.0 -> 12.1), unless a user remembers to re-build all 
python-dependent packages.

What do other people here think? ;-)

-- 
GNU/Linux * Slackware 'current'
LU #210970 LM #98222 SU #12583