Re: Should the weboob package stay in Debian?
Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 09:25:11PM +0200, Ole Streicher wrote:
>> Marc Haber <mh+debian-devel@zugschlus.de> writes:
>> > Staying compatible with the rest of the world is not covered by our
>> > core principles?
>>
>> Obviously we renamed packages (which made us incompatible with the rest
>> of the world) already if needed. Rememver iceweasel or icedove?
>>
>> Possible renames is already built in our interpretation of DFSG §3,
>> that we allow renaming when original names are forbidden by license).
>
> Package names exist in Debian only. Every distribution has its own
> namespace, and relations matter only within that distribution.
>
> On the other hand, executable names do matter for compatibility with
> scripts. Especially for a CLI tool like weboob.
That is not just about package names -- even the programs were called
like that (with the original names linked to it, however). When I
started Icedove, the program title (and everything else) still showed
the Debian name. This is also "end user compatibility".
I don't see why renaming would break our core principles. When it comes
to "Our priorities are our users [...]", we have to weight between
offending users and staying compatible, so the outcome is depending on
the weight for each topic (and any well-founded solution would not break
this principle).
Cheers
Ole
Reply to: