Re: Do we really need the laspa- prefix?

[Junichi Uekawa <dancer@netfort.gr.jp>]

Hi,

> I'd  like to sponsor  the upload  this package, but  before  I need to
> clear the naming convention of ladspa related packages.
> 
> Generally  speaking I think that  Debian  packages names should try to
> match exactly  the upstream  project name. In  this  case the upstream
> name is "vcf", which I think would be an  acceptable name for a Debian
> package.
> 
> The ladspa- prefix seems to really needed to me in  this case, and, as
> Junichi also pointed in  the previous post  of this bug, the essential
> is to 'Provides: ladspa-plugin'.
> 
> So if nobody has nothing in contrary I'd  upload the package under the
> name "vcf" (for both source package and binary package).

The only possible objection I could imagine is that the name is too
short.  However, if such a package does not exist anywhere else, then
that's not a problem; please go ahead.

regards,
	junichi
-- 
dancer@{debian.org,netfort.gr.jp}   Debian Project