Bug#363108: ITP: ladspa-vcf -- audio EQ biquad filters for LADSPA

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

Hi,

> > What would be the binary package name?
> >
> > Currently, the practice seems like:
> > *-plugins
> > (which might be a bit too generic, looking at it now).
> 
> My current package uses ladspa-vcf.
> Indeed the -plugins seems not very good to me.
> 
> I'd prefer ladspa-vcf or perhaps ladspa-plugins-vcf.
> 
> What do you think?

Looking at gstreamer, they chose

	gstreamer<version>-<pluginname>

ladspa could do the same with

	ladspa-<pluginname>

i.e. your initial choice sounds like the most logical solution.

Although theoretically ladspa hosts can have 'ladspa' in their package
name, it's less likely to have ladspa-only hosts. On the other hand,
plugins usually are ladspa-only plugins, so the name would be logical.

This kind of conflicts with current DSSI plugin naming scheme, but I
think DSSI might be the wrong one in this case.

Something to note in policy[1], I suppose.

[1] http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia


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