On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 11:37:16PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Antonio S. de A. Terceiro <asaterceiro@inf.ufrgs.br> [2004.11.17.2330 +0100]: > > libfactory++-dev - C++ template factory framework > > ... that this is my software, which I named libfactory because I did > not know better. It's also just a set of headers, so more a toolkit > than a library... but nomenclature is vague here... The problem with a lib*-dev package is that people expect a lib* to go along with it, but on the other hand people don't expect a build-depends on a lib*. And, of course, nobody expects the spanish inquisition... <grin> > It would be interesting to get some comments on this. > > FWIW, I am now almost in favour of pstreams -- as Antonio originally > called it -- as it's the product name after all. From what I can see, the package wouldn't provide anything useful at runtime, which is the intent of lib* package (IMO), and a lib*-dev package is for providing build-time stuff for a lib* package, so straight up pstreams seems like a winner to me. - Matt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature