* 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