On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 06:44:03PM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote: > On Wednesday 09 April 2003 17:51, Brett Cundal wrote: > > Hi mentors, > > > > First, I have an opinion question: I'm maintaining the gnu-smalltalk > > package, and I'm considering splitting it up into several packages (X > > and non-X for starters). If I do so, the resulting packages will have > > rather long names (gnu-smalltalk-common springs to mind). Would it be > > a good idea to rename the package "gst"? It's nice and short, and the > > interpreter executable is called "gst". Is it considered bad form to > > rename a package unless absolutely neccesary? AFAIK, it's not > > technically difficult in a case like this. > > remember, some people go hunting for packages knowing only the upstream name. > When at all possible it is a good idea to name it whatever they do while > following Debian conventions. As for the name being too long, that is ok, > don't worry about it. We have things like libperl-foo-bar-baz too. I know we have such mind-blowingly long package names, but I don't think they're widely held to be a *good* thing. :) Given the suggestion to follow upstream as much as possible, and given that upstream calls the package "smalltalk", I'm wondering if I should just rename the package to "smalltalk"... > > Secondly, supposing I did rename the package, is it okay to keep > > installing to /usr/share/gnu-smalltalk, /usr/lib/gnu-smalltalk, etc? > > Does the install path have to match the package name > > (i.e. /usr/share/gst)? The previous maintainer moved the default > > installation location (/usr/share/smalltalk) seemingly only to match > > the package name, and I'm curious if that was neccesary. I don't see > > anything indicating that in Policy or the FHS... If I change the > > install directory for whatever reason, could that break anything? > > again, it is a good idea to mimic the upstream. failing that, yes it is > preferable for the path to match the package name. So, pros for renaming to "smalltalk" (in order of importance?): 1) Package name matches upstream 2) File locations match upstream 3) Reduces my .diff to only debian/* files 4) Shorter name :) Cons: 1) Package name changes 2) File locations change on upgrade 3) Name is quite generic 4) Won't catch upstream errors caused by changing PACKAGE :) I guess what I don't know is exactly how bad the cons are... Opinions welcome. :) -- Brett
Attachment:
pgpHLY_4FU_1K.pgp
Description: PGP signature