Re: ITA: Jail, not the FreeBSD jail

[Amaya <barbwired@bigfoot.com>]

Thanks a lot for your quick reply...

David Starner wrote:
> BSD's Jail is (Free?)BSD specific, and probably would go into another package
> (bsdmainutils?) if a port were packaged. If you were packaging jail anew, I
> might recommend a longer more descriptive name, but renaming a package is
> painful to current users, and definitely not worth the trouble here.

There would be no problem with the names of the binaries the package includes
either (tcplog & icmplog).

> A maintainer should find a compromise between a full description and excess
> verbosity. (For example, the package utf-converter (which never made into
> Debian) should have been named utf-converter-zh, as it only handled Chinese
> character sets (and Unicode). But utf-converter-gb2123-big5 or
> utf-converter-for-chinese would have fallen into the overly verbose stage.
> (As I apparently have.))

This package requires some work, because it follows an old version of
debian-policy, I wonder if I should change the description as well and if it is
as painful as renaming a package (I guess it isn't, but correct me if I'm
wrong). 

Please note that I was only closing the orphaning bug, and haven't finished my
work on it. Also there's a new version of Jail, that I'm currently working on,
that closes its two only bugs. I will change the description field if needed
and do as many changes as required, but please, bear in mind that I'm a new
mantainer, open to directions, but not truly experienced yet ;-)

Thanks a lot for the feedback, and accept my apologies if this thread should be
in debian-mentors rather than here, but I didn't start it anyway 0:-)

-- 
   All of us are stars and deserve the right to twinkle  - Marilyn Monroe
 Pardon me, but you have obviously mistaken me for someone who gives a damn 
  Proudly running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (Kernel 2.2.17) on this Dell Laptop