Re: O: Gnus -- A versatile News and mailing list reader for Emacsen.
* Bernhard R. Link <email@example.com> [060424 18:14]:
> * Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> [060424 17:39]:
> > > Package gnus, version x.y-z.dfsg.
> > > That way its clearly marked that gnus is modified to be dfsg free,
> > > and you dont change any source/package name. A lot of other packages
> > > in Debian already go this way, I dont see why gnus can't do it.
> > In Debian, source package components have precise meaning.
> > The package name is Gnus, and the version you are referring to is the
> > "upstream" version.
I must excuse for this mail. I really thought you were just removing
stuff. I would not have imagine that it is a full fork, with changed
build system and other changes to the original source directory.
That is of course nothing to name it the same.
But as said on irc, I find it highly confusing to name a fork -dfsg in
the context of Debian, where people got used to get a -dfsg suffix
(though not in the context of source names but versions), if it is
still the upstream stuff with only things removed.
I do not understand why you do a full fork, but I agree it should be
named differntly then.
Bernhard R. Link