Re: ITP: foreman -- manage Procfile-based applications
On 13249 March 1977, Per Andersson wrote:
>> There's a more popular/more complicated piece of software called Foreman,
>> for which there's an RFP already, as well as a component of that,
>> foremancli, already in Debian. Upstream provides a package too, although you
>> could argue it isn't our problem if there's a naming conflict.
> I saw this but decided to ignore it for now since there hasn't been any activity
> with Foreman in over a year. If the name conflict arise in Debian it is a pretty
> small matter to change it then I think. I.e. Foreman renaming to
> theforeman as
> the upstream web page or this foreman renaming to ruby-foreman or some such,
> it is not a big thing IMHO.
In Debian its actually a pretty big matter. The more so the longer the
wrongly named package exists in Debian. So it is *much* preferred to not
have it at all, if the conflict is known from the beginning.