On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 03:42:31PM +0100, Paul Seelig wrote: > > 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? If the first webbrowswer in Debian got to grab the name "webbrowser" it would satisfy all of our problems by pointing to a browser that, many years later, only a tiny fraction of users use. First come first serve is not the way to hand out generic names. Generic names provide an easy to remember how to call upon a program with a given functionality but they're not a very good way to differentiate or remember particular programs. Programs would be better served to give themselves an original name, descriptive where possible, and leave the generic names for aliases or, where appropriate, alternatives. Regards, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill mako@debian.org http://mako.yukidoke.org/
Attachment:
pgpEQHp_ibSL9.pgp
Description: PGP signature