Subject: Re: naming rules for packages with perl modules
To: Greg Troxel <email@example.com>
From: Johnny Lam <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/18/2005 13:14:33
Greg Troxel wrote:
> Would it be easy to split into two packages? For example, my
> wip/p5-HTML-Latex and wip/html2latex packages both come from same
> source (called html2latex).
> Beyond the work you did, I'd have to avoid installing exiftool,
> because the auto packlist includes it. The package is 2.7MB and the
> script is just over 64K. The ratio of effort to disk space savings
> for the few people who would like the perl module and not the
> command-line tool seems quite unfavorable.
It would seem like the big, useful bit provided by exiftool is the perl
modules, and the script is just something concrete that uses the
modules. It would be better (IMHO) to name it with the p5-* convention.
There are no hard-and-fast rules for these kinds of things -- just use
-- Johnny Lam <email@example.com>