From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: Re: Agreeing on some "rules" for packaging. Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 23:59:08 +0200 Message-ID: <20130830215908.GA28681@debian> References: <521D1E38.9090604@gmail.com> <87sixuc71q.fsf@gnu.org> <521E423C.7010107@gmail.com> <20130828205616.GA12493@debian> <87r4dd4eug.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37423) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VFWiv-0003rc-Rr for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:59:29 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VFWio-0001z6-FO for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:59:21 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]:52589) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VFWio-0001yx-5B for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:59:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87r4dd4eug.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: guix-devel@gnu.org On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:42:31AM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Looks like it already went in. :-) Yes, that was a random push, sorry! But the good thing in a vcs is that one can always modify and go back. > I would perhaps move “Python Modules” into a “Specific Packages” > subsection (or something like that), where we might eventually have > “Perl Packages” as well. WDYT? Maybe once we have Perl Packages. I do not want to create too many sublevels. Or we just create a separate section Perl Packages, depending on whether we write essentially the same thing or not. > > +A package has actually two names associated to it: > s/to it/with it/ Ok. > s/package manager/commands such as @command{guix package} and @command{guix build}/ "package management commands such as ... > > +Both are usually the same and correspond to the lowercase conversion of the > > +project name chosen by upstream. For instance, the GNUnet project is packaged > s/by upstream/upstream/ Ok. > s/But see @ref{Python Modules}/@xref{Python Modules},/ No, since @xref creates text starting by "See", so is only suitable for the beginning of a sentence. (But the info rendering is different from the pdf, with which I am working mainly.) > s/defined in @ref {Package Naming}/previously defined (@pxref{Package Naming})/ This also gives strange output with an additional "see". > Add linebreaks around @example, possibly with @noindent before the > lonely lines. Okay for the line break (which does not change anything in pdf). > Add linebreak before “Some modules”. Okay. > Also, please leave two spaces after an end-of-sentence period. Okay. I suppose this also means that the period at the end of a sentence is not allowed to fall at the end of an input line? So "The weather is nice. It is raining." needs to become, for instance: "The weather is nice. It is raining."? Since there have not been any objections on the content of the guidelines, maybe you could push Python 3 following this rule, Cyril? I am curious whether all our packages will survive the switch to Python 3... Andreas