Re: more overly-generic package names from gnustep
Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> writes:
> > But what about my original point -- are others also annoyed by this
> > namespace pollution? Is there any reason not to fix it?
>
> You mean: About useing gs for gnustep? Yes, I'm also annoyed about this.
No.
Just forget I ever mentioned `gs-' (`gnustep-' is fine) and go read my
original post: the _existing_ gnustep packages are polluting the
package namespace with overly generic names.
Gah...
-Miles
--
`...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so comprehensive
that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished products
less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.' [The Economist]
Reply to: