Re: re : Opie status update for Feb 5th
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 12:28:39PM +0100, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> Ivan wrote:
> > I have what I have done up for apt'ng right now. These all follow what
> > should be the final file layout. All of the non-lib package names follow
> > the Opie naming standard of "opie-*". If we find that any binaries need
> > to be renamed we can do that when they are pointed out.
> I see a problem here: the already-existing *opie* packages,
> for the OPIE OTP system, which include opie-client and opie-server,
> which both fall into the namespace you want to use.
> Yes, it's a shame that 2 projects use the same name :}
and libopie-dev as well as the source name opie. I'm well aware of this. So
far there is no clashes. Personally the naming convention of opie better
suits these apps then the OTP apps. But this is my opinion. Either way
this is not a namespace requirement and I don't forsee such a generic
package name coming out of this project as opie-client or opie-server.
Ivan E. Moore II
GPG Fingerprint=F2FC 69FD 0DA0 4FB8 225E 27B6 7645 8141 90BC E0DD