Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add Scikit-learn.

[Andreas Enge]

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 06:11:03PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> I think a Python “module” is a single .py file.  In that case “package”
> seems more accurate, no?

Indeed, that is true. Still I am looking for a justification to rename
"python2-py2cairo" to "python2-cairo", that is, use the module name for
a package containing a single module. Below is a proposed new text for
this section (more readable than a patch), which also replaces another
occurrence of "module" by "package".

What do you think?

Andreas


@node Python Modules
@subsection Python Modules

We currently package Python 2 and Python 3, under the Scheme variable names
@code{python-2} and @code{python} as explained in @ref{Version Numbers}.
Python programs standing for themselves are named as any other package,
using the lowercase upstream name.

To avoid confusion and naming clashes with other programming languages, it
seems desirable that the name of a package for Python modules contains
the word @code{python}.
As base name, we use the lowercase module name for Python packages
containing a single module, or the lowercase upstream package name
otherwise; from this, we drop all occurrences of the word @code{python}.
Some packages are compatible with only one version of Python, others with
both.
If the package with base name @code{foo} compiles only with Python 3, we name
it @code{python-foo}; if it compiles only with Python 2, we name it
@code{python2-foo}. If it is compatible with both versions, we create two
packages with the corresponding names.

For instance, the upstream package python-dateutil is packaged under the
names @code{python-dateutil} and @code{python2-dateutil}.