[ adding back the Cc to the bug report ]
On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 12:01:17PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 11:13:50AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > * Package name : core
>
> This package name is a little bit too generic. Better one may be
> ocaml-core.
"core" is the name used by upstream for its tarballs, hence I would have
liked to have it as the Debian source package name. However I agree with
your concern and I will change it back.
> > Version : 0.5.0
> > Upstream Author : Jane Street Holding <opensource@janestcapital.com>
> This does not really look like a name of a human.
Does it need to be? The libraries is developed by a company and the
copyright is held by the company. Maybe I can in this specific case (as
I've contacts within the company) discover who actually wrote the code,
but in the general case it won't be possible. So I presume that setting
the upstream author / copyright to a non-humans should be supported
somehow.
> > Description : Jane Street Capital's alternative standard library for OCaml
> Is "Jane Street Capital" a generic term? Better remove it from the short
> description: "Alternative standard library for OCaml".
Nope, there have been in the past other projects like that in the OCaml
community, this one is identified within the community via the company
name.
> > Core is Jane Street Capital's alternative standard library for OCaml.
> Duplication?
Nope: short vs long description. Or are you suggesting the first line of
long is too similar to the whole short description?
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{upsilon.cc,cs.unibo.it,debian.org} -<%>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
(15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature