[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#241614: Renaming packages


On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 10:47:35PM -0500, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> >>>>> "OA" == Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org> writes:
>     OA> With funny capitalization, software command name may be OK but
>     OA> all lower case package name is not sensible thing to do.
> ?? AFAIK all Debian packages have to have lowercase package names.

Yes.  That is why usable name space is very precious thing to waste for
the package name.

>     OA> For all these X-GUI program, command file name are secondary
>     OA> value and menu entry has more impact to the user experience.
> None of my GNUstep packages install helper scripts into /usr/bin
> anymore. It was too much of a pain to maintain.

I see.  So issue is solely the package name choice.

> All of them use "GNUstep" as menu hints.
>     OA> Do not you think "making GNUstep apps easy to find by the
>     OA> user" is a very "good reason"?  Just add "gnustep-" as some
>     OA> other packages.  Why not?
> Because the other packages prefixed with "gnustep-" are part of the
> official GNUstep project. Also because if I do it now, and later it's
> decided that GNUstep application packages have to be named "*-gnustep"
> or "*.app", I have to rename the packages again.

So you understand the current package name is not the optimal thing.  

I think your homework is to figure out by talking to the maintainers
who maintain similar packages and create defacto standard for the naming
convention. Consistency of name space makes a good user experience.

If this is your intention, please do not close these bugs but downgrade
it to "wishlist" and try find nice naming convention for these gnustep
programs, please.  (I do not want to see too much name change either.)

My short research:

Most names seem to follow: 

I understand that gnustep is used as the <main-name> part thus making it
difficult for you to make it an prefix/suffix.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: