* Josselin Mouette <josselin.mouette@ens-lyon.org> [2003-08-28 13:06]: > Le jeu 28/08/2003 à 12:35, Gerfried Fuchs a écrit : >> About the name of the package: Discussable, but I don't really know >> what to use else. The package is simply called tetrinet upstream. > > Why not split into tetrinet-server and tetrinet-client? The server binary has only 16k compared to 61k client binary, and I dislike the idea of the overhead for this small packages. Beside that, I don't think that I will provide an init.d script for it neither, doesn't make much sense IMNSHO. I talked with fabbione a little bit about it, maybe I will leave out the tetrinet-server binary completely, it doesn't offer anything fancy anyway so people who like to have their own server running should rather use tetrinetx. If I leave it out I might consider naming the package tetrinet-client as a whole (for the binary -- I guess I'll stick with tetrinet for the source package). I am wait for a reaction from upstream too currently. I will consider his ideas on the topic, too. So long, and thanks for the input. Alfie -- "Kaum wird das Wetter schlechter und die Tage kürzer, fallen die Newbies über das Netz her wie die Blätter von den Bäumen." (Ulf Schaefer in de.talk.jokes)
Attachment:
pgpFRWdtzOhL9.pgp
Description: PGP signature