Prefer "etcd" as the source package name

[Mark Shuttleworth]

While we do have a precedent in Python, with python-foo being a common pattern for package names, I think that mainly addresses the case where an existing C library is being wrapped, so python-foo is the Python wrapper for libfoo. In this case, etcd is an application, perhaps "etcd" would be a better name for the package?

[Jelmer Vernooij (jelmer)]

Confusingly, there are two upstream etcd packages. This one is the etcd client library, which upstream refers to as go-etcd (https://github.com/coreos/go-etcd) as well.

The server package (etcd itself) is referred to by upstream as just"etcd" (https://github.com/coreos/etcd), and I have a separate ITP open for that.

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=741065

[Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl)]

Perhaps etc-client then?

Mark

[Jelmer Vernooij (jelmer)]

I considered that, but it would be inconsistent with the Debian golang library package naming conventions: https://wiki.debian.org/MichaelStapelberg/GoPackaging . It would have been better if upstream had named this Go package etcd_client or somesuch.

There are also a fair number of Go client packages in the archive with similar names. E.g. the postgresql golang client library is housed in golang-pq-dev, and the go openldap client library is in golang-openldap-dev.