Nicholas D Steeves <nstee...@gmail.com> writes:
> P.P.S. I can start with one of debian-el, devscripts-el, or
> dpkg-dev-el as a proof of concept, and it will also be easier to just
> iterate over the *.els once these exceptions have been dealt with. I
> assume that they ought to remain grouped together and become
> elpa-debian-el, elpa-devscripts.el, and elpa-dpkg-dev.el, with
> repositories on salsa named debian-el, devscripts-el, and dpkg-dev-el.
I've actually done this, before finding this message.
See
https://salsa.debian.org/emacsen-team/dpkg-dev-el
https://salsa.debian.org/emacsen-team/debian-el
The former depends on the latter, as it turns out.
FWIW, I don't think any binary package ought to start with "elpa" and
end "-el" or "\.el", but other than that I'm flexible about the naming.
I (so-far) had the idea that "dpkg-dev", and "debian" could be upstream
packages in e.g. melpa-stable. OTOH, "debian" is annoyingly generic, so
that might have to change.
d
