Source package directory naming [WAS: Re: cURL 7.9 is packaged]

[Christopher Faylor]

On Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 07:59:06AM -0400, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>Robert Collins wrote:
>> 
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Roth, Kevin P. [ mailto:KPRoth@MarathonOil.com ]
>> 
>> > From looking at other pkgs, it seems the source should extract
>> > to ./curl-7.9 (without the cygwin-specific "-1" and without
>> > the fully qualified path). Is my assumption correct?
>> 
>> Uhmm good question. I'm not sure. Place the curl tarballs in a directory
>> with setup.exe and no setup.ini. Run setup.exe and choose to install
>> from local - it should find curl and let you play around. As for the -1,
>> I think opinions are divided in the list members, personally I don't
>> care - as long as you never released a curl-7.9-2 that has different
>> source (ie with a minor patch applied).
>
>I've noticed that the source packages are inconsistent.  That doesn't
>mean that they should stay inconsistent.  The source package directory
>should reflect the name of the packages.  So for this curl package you
>would want your source directory named curl-7.9-1.  Robert stated that
>it didn't matter to him, but it does matter to some of which I am one.

Right.  I have let some non-standard source directory names drift in.
The source directory should be the same as the package name.

If the tar ball is named foo-1.3.2-15.tar.bz2 the source directory should
be foo-1.3.2-15.

I didn't realize until recently that a lot of people were not following
this convention but this is the convention that I'd like to see going
forward.

cgf