Re: Bug#696899: can anybody sponsor an ITP for premake4 ?
> Since no one else here seems to be wondering, I'll just ask myself: Is
> there any reason why the package is going to be renamed to "premake4",
> i.e. appending the major version to the package name?
> If this is going to get uploaded as "premake4", this is technically not
> an adoption of "premake" but a NEW upload of "premake4".
> If you really mean to adopt "premake", you should rename the package
> from "premake4" to "premake" unless version 3 and 4 are fundamentally
> different and it makes sense to keep both versions in the archive.
As I recall it was discussed earlier. Please read  and maybe even whole
thread if you have time and wish.