[Pkg-mono-devel] Mono wants our opinion about splitting upstream packages

[Dave Beckett]

On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 23:10:12 +0100
Mirco 'meebey' Bauer <mail@meebey.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
> in this post Miguel asks for opinions about splitting up the upstream
> mono packages:
> http://lists.ximian.com/archives/public/mono-devel-list/2004-March/004546.html

We were just discussing this on IRC (#debian-mono) and I think it would
be best if on the debian side we followed the precedent for java, ruby
and maybe others in using 'lib' in the name for things that aren't
applications/binaries.

On "Java Libraries" in the Debian policy for Java:

[[
Java libraries packages must be named libXXX[version]-java (without the
brackets), where the version part is optional and should  only contain
the necessary part. The version part should only be used to avoid naming
colisions. The XXX part is the actual package name used in the text
below.
]]
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/java-policy/x105.html

so libXXX[version]-dotnet ?

It is useful to distinguish libraries from programs.

The other thing to consider is maybe also in the page above, where
the arch dependent files go.  The java policy says they should be
libXXX[version]-jni and the libXXX[version]-java must depend on
the -jni version.   I'm not sure what you might call the dotnet ones.

http://wiki.debian.net/?MonoConventions suggests the directories
these things might go in - /usr/share/dotnet/lib

Is it time for a draft dotnet packaging policy?

Dave