Re: FreeDiams package names

[Sebastian Hilbert <sebastian.hilbert@gmx.net>]

Am Dienstag, 15. März 2011, 09:26:09 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> Hi Sebastian,
> 
> I admit I do not understand your suggestion at all.  Could you please
> be more verbose in how far changing a name is helpful?  The current split
> of the package has only one single purpose:  Splitting the architecture
> dependant and (large) architecture indepandatn parts to not waste mirror
> space of Debian mirrors (as if it would be the case if everything would
> be in one package).  This is a very common way in Debian.  I do not see
> why we should complicate things with an extra metapackage.

There is hard reason and I am fine with leaving it as is. The reasoning was 
that the project freadiams is logically split into data and client anyway by 
providing a data package. So the suggestion was to rename the freediams 
package to freediams-client.

From what I hear some sort of server might appear anyway through the means of 
a webservice.

But for now I am fine with leaving this as is.

Sebastian

> 
> Kind regards
> 
>         Andreas.
> 
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 04:33:32PM +0100, Sebastian Hilbert wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Please consider the following change.
> > 
> > I would like to see a metapackage freediams which would install
> > freediams- client and freediams-data.
> > 
> > The current freediams package would be renamed to freediams-client and
> > the newly created freediams package is a metapackage.
> > 
> > Why ? Well freediams is the name of the project, hence a metapackage. Why
> > freediams-client ? Given there is no seperate package freediams-server
> > this could lead to some debate. Alternatively freediams-client could
> > also be called freediams-gui.
> > 
> > I would like to hear your opinion on this.
> > 
> > Sebastian Hilbert
> > GNUmed team