Hi!

The other day I noticed that this packages has modules in the Dpkg::
root namespace. This means dpkg itself would not be able to use those
names currently (or in the near future). And although I don't have
immediate plans or need for those names, I've had in mind for a while
to start adding modules for the specialized file formats, so the
Dpkg::Copyright hierarchy would get used by dpkg itself in the future.

The current Dpkg:: modules provided by this package do not seem like
they could be integrated into dpkg proper anyway, given the API patterns
and its dependencies. So to avoid issues, conflicts and confusion, it
would be nice if these got moved under the Config::Model namespace? Or
was there some specific reason to use the root Dpkg:: namespace?

Thanks,
Guillem

be used outside of Config::Model to scan copyright or to store grants in
Dpkg::Copyright::Grant::* (although I forgot to add doc for these modules...).
I'm willing to extract them out of libconfig-model-dpkg-perl if needed.

That said, I can move them out of Dpkg hierarchy, but what should be the new
hierarchy ? (naming is hard...).

May be DpkgX ...

I'm open for suggestions.

All the best