Re: renaming gtk2-engines-gtk-qt
Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le samedi 29 juillet 2006 à 16:11 +0200, Bastian Venthur a écrit :
>> Hi devs,
>>
>> I've adopted the package gtk-qt-engine a few days ago and wonder why the
>> binary is actually named "gtk2-engines-gtk-qt". I'm not really happy
>> with this name and would like to rename the package back to upstreams
>> name "gtk-qt-engine".
>>
>> Here some thoughts:
>>
>> First, the package is not really a gnome package since it's mostly
>> interesting for KDE users. So the gtk2-engines-naming scheme is a bit
>> misleading. Especially for gnome-users just browsing for gnome-themes or
>> KDE-users searching directly for the gtk-qt-engine.
>>
>> Second, the package is not really a gtk2-theme. In fact it provides a
>> program for the KDE control center which allows to chose one of the
>> available gnome themes OR the "look-like-QT-theme" for gtk apps.
>>
>> I'm not sure why the former maintainer of this package decided to name
>> the package this way. I've asked him and he is not sure anymore but
>> seems to be uncomfortable with the name as well today.
>>
>> I'd really like to rename the package back to "gtk-qt-engine", but since
>> I'm not sure why the package has it's current name, I ask on this list.
>
> As I've already told you in private on friday, this naming scheme didn't
> came from the GNOME team, but originally GTK1 themes were named
> gtk-engines-foo, and GTK2 themes gtk2-engines-foo. Currently most of
> them have been merged in the gtk2-engines package.
And gtk-qt-engine is not part of gtk2-engines -- for good reason as
explained above.
> I'd say it is better to conform to this naming scheme unless there is a
> good reason not to do so. It is just more clear for users.
I've given some arguments yesterday. The renaming would be painless and
a smooth upgrade without user interaction is possible [1].
> Now, if the package isn't only a gtk2 engine, maybe it's worth being
> split into 2 parts. However renaming to gtk-qt-engine, breaking the
> naming scheme just to have the same name as the source package, seems
> pretty counterproductive to me.
No I don't see any reasons to split the package. It is intended for KDE
users and provides full functionality as it is for them. Splitting it up
would make things only more complicated.
Maybe some official document describing the features a package must have
to fit into the gtk2-engines naming scheme would help to clear the
situation.
Please note that I'm not against the naming schemes. More than the half
of my packages follows the KDE-naming scheme. But in this case I just
don't see gtk-qt-engines fit into the current scheme.
Cheers,
Bastian
1. http://wiki.debian.org/Renaming_a_Package
--
Bastian Venthur
http://venthur.de
Reply to: