rodent%NetBSD.org@localhost writes: [py-py-bcrypt] >> Can we please get a less silly package name? >> >> Joerg > > Hey, take it up with upstream. :) I didn't name the package - just wanting to > avoid problems like ruby-zip when we think our naming conventions are better > than the real package names. POLA, etc. Upstream seems to be named py-bcrypt, which is not so odd. There are large numbers of existing packages with the following (upstream->pkg) patterns: py-foo ==> py-foo pyfoo ==> py-foo python-foo => py-foo foo-python => py-foo foo => py-foo and zero existing packages with upstream py-bar and package name py-py-bar. So you've departed from a well-established pattern - I agree with Joerg that this should be fixed.
Attachment:
pgpqRhL_ancyX.pgp
Description: PGP signature