Re: more overly-generic package names from gnustep
On 23-Mar-04, 07:39 (CST), Mathieu Roy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Frank K?ster <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Err, no - please don't use gs. That's ghostscript.
> Well, gs is ghostscript. But the proposal is to use gs as prefix, not
> as name.
His point, with which I agree, is that many people would associate
gs-whatever with ghostscript, not gnustep. Using gstep- is less likely
to be confusing.
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world. -- seen on the net