On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 12:50:55 +0100, TJ wrote: > > AFAICS the dist name is Win::Hivex and it ships two modules > > Win::Hivex and Win::Hivex::Registry, so libwin-hivex-perl seems > > indeed like the logical candidate for the package name in my POV. > > > > Why do you think it doesn't "feel" correct? > > Mainly the difference in the binary package name from the other packages > built from the source. the rest all being "libhivex" so "libwin-hivex" > seems, at least in my mind, to disconnect the name-space for users. Right, I supposed that was the point. > I know when I'm looking for packages using dpkg-query or apt-cache I > usually assume/expect that related packages will have a common stub. At least apt-file search Hivex.pm would still work :) I guess it boils down the the angle -- from a Perl point of the having the dist name and the package name in sync makes it easier. > I don't object to the name but it just feels counter-intuitive to me. I see that point. Maybe someone else from the group has some additional thoughts? Cheers, gregor -- .''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ -- GPG Key IDs: 0x8649AA06, 0x00F3CFE4 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of Free Software Foundation Europe `- NP: Stan Getz: Take Five
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature