Quoting Justin B Rye (jbr@edlug.org.uk):
> Since it's unlikely to get into dictionaries, the only guide to
> what's "correct" is the majority opinion: "metapackage".
>
> Of course, I say that because I agree with the consensus here, but I
> can also offer a supporting argument if you'd prefer.
>
> * Most coinages in English with "meta" seem to be written solid:
> "metadata", "metafiction", "metamathematics", and so on.
> * "Meta-" also occurs, sometimes to avoid an awkward string of
> vowel letters ("meta-argument"), sometimes as IUPAC-standard
> chemical terminology ("meta-tyrosine").
> * "Meta" as a freestanding word can be used as an adjective, with a
> slightly different sense ("this conversation is far too
> meta"), so that's worth avoiding.
From Justin's arguments, it seems that English uses about the same
rule than French with such latin prepositions: write them solid unless
the juxtaposition introduces a diphtongue (en?):
multiplace
multicarte
multi-utilisateur
I would then go for "metapackage".
As Justin pointed as well, chemical notation for meta is pretty
different but should probably apply only to chemical species.
Such check could even be added to recenly added Lintian check about
some common incorrect spelling (MySQL, PostgreSQL, etc.)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature