On Friday, April 24, 2020 11:54:17 AM EDT Kan-Ru Chen wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Apr 25, 2020, at 12:34 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > On Friday, April 24, 2020 11:11:49 AM EDT Kan-Ru Chen wrote: > > > * Package name : nss-tls Description : encrypted glibc name > > > > > > resolving library which uses DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH) > > > > > > nss-tls is an alternative, encrypted name resolving library to use > > > with glibc, which uses DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH). > > > > Without knowing more that what is in the ITP, nss-tls seems like a > > counter- > > intuitive name for something that doesn't use TLS, but instead HTTPS. > > Indeed, I agree it is counter-intuitive! If I am starting a new project > I would probably call it nss-doh or nss-https. > > > Is this really the best name for the package? Could you explain the > > background behind the name? > > The only reason right now is because it's the name used by upstream. I > choose to keep the current name and mention DoH in the description to > help search. > > I plan to ask upstream author if they intend to support DoT in the > future then the name makes a little more sense. Otherwise if they can > change the name to nss-https or something else to avoid confusion. Would it make sense to resolve that with upstream before introducing this to Debian? It would save a trip through New and the confusion inherent in package name instability. Scott K
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.