On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 14:14 +0100, Michael Koch wrote: I'm just an end user, but I'd like to share my thoughts on the package naming. > > I would like to name the secondary native packages with a -jbi prefix > > (Java Binary Interface). Some people like the name -bcabi because that > > is what the GCJ folks tend to refer to it as. BC ABI: Binary Compatible > > Application Binary Interface. I don't think bcabi is descriptive at all. > > -jbi is a bad name as none else on this planet knows the interface under > this name I would prefer -bcabi (as this is the name its called > upstream) or -gcj (to make clean where it comes from). As a user -bcabi is not really descriptive to me. I would hesitate to install this package as I would need to find out what -bcabi means (I am aware that it is a GCJ compiled version of the java package, but without reading this list it would not be obvious). -jbi is similar. With -gcj I would mentally associate this packages as having something to do with GCJ and would probally install it for a speed increase. So from my point of view a -gcj name is probally a good idea. Thanks for listening Jamie -- PGP/MIME or S/MIME signed mail preferred. No HTML mail. No Word attachments. PGP Key ID 0x42E2C1E5 Fingerprint 3C77 9621 84C5 C32F D409 A38D A035 7E65 42E2 C1E5
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part