Bug#363108: Do we really need the laspa- prefix?

[Free Ekanayaka <freee@debian.org>]

Hi all,

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).

Ciao,

Free