On Friday 07 September 2007, Till Maas wrote:
On Do September 6 2007, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> I would personally call it python-fuse anyway for consistency, and
> perhaps add "Provides: fuse-python = VR", but maybe that's just me.
Is doing it the other way round not good enough?
Name: fuse-python
Provides: python-fuse = VR
Good enough for whom? Both of those definitely satisfy the current naming
guidelines, but personally in cases like this I always go for "if it's bar
for foo, or bar used from foo or the like, its Name: is foo-bar", ie this one
would become python-fuse (assuming I guess correctly what the package
contains).