Re: Re: ITP: cddb.bundle -- CDDB Bundle for GNUstep
Miles Bader wrote:
> Jeff Teunissen <email@example.com> writes:
> > For me, I don't want GNUstep in the names of my programs because I am
> > not connected to GNUstep and don't want to be. It is just a couple of
> > libraries that I use to write my apps -- you wouldn't put "GTK+" in
> > the name of your apps, would you?
> Most GTK+ apps don't need any kind of special tag because they're named
> reasonably in the first place. The upstream developers apparently
> recognize that they will be often used as one part of a "mixed"
And developers writing with GNUstep recognize the same thing. The difference
is that we *have* to give enough information about an app using only two
pieces of information -- the name of the app and its icon.
Because of that _necessary_ restriction, we come up with names that are:
1. Not used by ANY other free software project,
2. Descriptive of what the application does,
3. "Iconable" (an icon can be created that fits with its name)
And that is about the extent of the decision-making process.
> Many "gnustep" apps OTOH, use absurdly generic names, and I can only
> conclude that the developers do not think about mixed systems at all.
I disagree in the first case, and you are incorrect in the second.
> It is this upstream flaw that forces these apps to have their names
> changed in Debian. A shame for true fans of those applications, I
> suppose, but what else can you expect?
What "forces" the names to be changed is some kind of requirement, not in
any foundation document nor in Policy, that the names of packages must be
"fair", and that we must protect people from "having to" install a couple of
GNUstep libraries when they select a package that they might like.
| Jeff Teunissen -=- Pres., Dusk To Dawn Computing -=- deek @ d2dc.net
| GPG: 1024D/9840105A 7102 808A 7733 C2F3 097B 161B 9222 DAB8 9840 105A
| Core developer, The QuakeForge Project http://www.quakeforge.net/
| Specializing in Debian GNU/Linux http://www.d2dc.net/~deek/