Jeremiah Foster wrote: > There is no real "freedom of choice" here since the "choice" leads to > unforeseen consequences, namely the breaking of expected naming schemes. > There was a freedom to choose in the beginning since any naming scheme > had not yet been devised. Now that one has been devised, there is an > expectation that module bar::thing be named libbar-thing-perl just as > libfoo-thing-perl. That is how users expect to find CPAN modules named > in debian, whether they provide a binary or not. Breaking that > convention is not freedom to choose, rather a gratuitous re-naming that > confuses and upsets users unnecessarily. > > As you can see from the above, I am against the re-naming and prefer > the scheme we currently have. So what is going happen to mime-tools, soap-lite, and timedate? Any objections to renaming them to fit the scheme we currently have?
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.