[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Source package naming for Perl modules



Jeremiah Foster wrote:
> There is no real "freedom of choice" here since the "choice" leads to
> unforeseen consequences, namely the breaking of expected naming schemes.
> There was a freedom to choose in the beginning since any naming scheme
> had not yet been devised. Now that one has been devised, there is an
> expectation that module bar::thing be named libbar-thing-perl just as
> libfoo-thing-perl. That is how users expect to find CPAN modules named
> in debian, whether they provide a binary or not. Breaking that
> convention is not freedom to choose, rather a gratuitous re-naming that
> confuses and upsets users unnecessarily.
>
> As you can see from the above, I am against the re-naming and prefer
> the scheme we currently have.

So what is going happen to mime-tools, soap-lite, and timedate?  Any 
objections to renaming them to fit the scheme we currently have?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: