Re: Dummy packages and metapackages (call for consistency in the descriptions)
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
IMHO, drop the "Meta" prefix, then. There is no shame in doing so.
Well, just dropping the meta is a little bit to simple. There is an
extensive documentation about the Custom Debian Distribution techniques
and the tools that are used at
It makes IMHO no sense to invent just another prefix in front of "package"
instead of "meta" just because there might be some additional (optional)
information inside these packages which is not contained in debian/control,
but reasonably is called meta information for the relevant task. It makes
no sense to play wording games just because there are some people who think
that the definition we gave on
does not fit into the scope they would give the name "meta package".