Re: more overly-generic package names from gnustep
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 03:42:31PM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote:
> cjwatson@debian.org (Colin Watson) writes:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 12:46:33AM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote:
> >
> > Does that mean that only one project is allowed to be elegant and
> > aesthetically pleasing? This seems unfortunate.
> >
> So the alternative so far is only to allow *no package at all* to be
> named in an elegant and aesthetically pleasing way? There can only be
> one for each name - be it a generic term or an invented name. Why not
> allow this opportunity to those who are first?
The problem is this will be deemed fair unfairly. People with
reputations who land-grab will just take it. People like me, newcomers,
who want pim, will be told to go suck eggs.
I'm going to put a stick in the ground with /usr/bin/tupim and
/etc/alternatives/pim, and if GNUStep wants to provide a PIM and take
over /etc/alternatives/pim -- that's fine with me, as long as I can
change it back. Similarly for "viewpdf" etc.
Reply to: