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

Bug#698111: ITP: zimlib -- Standard library implementation of ZIM specifications

Hi Raphaël,

On 11:14 Mon 14 Jan     , Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2013, Vasudev Kamath wrote:
> > I will ask upstream
> Thanks.
> > But as I said name is actually abbreviation and renaming it doesn't make
> > sense. What do you think?
> I don't agree with this statement. Coming up with a name is always a
> creative endeavour and you can always come up with something different
> if really needed.
> The question is more whether upstream is amenable to changing the name
> given that zim from zim-wiki.org seems to predate openzim.org. 

I did some more investigation and I don't see any file name clash
betweek zim from zim-wiki and zimlib. Even though both packages have zim
in the package name there is  description field which clarifies any
confusion between both packages for end user.

So I guess renaming from upstream is not required. Please share your

Warm Regards,
Vasudev Kamath
Connect on ~friendica: copyninja@{frndk.de | vasudev.homelinux.net}
IRC nick: copyninja | vasudev {irc.oftc.net | irc.freenode.net}
GPG Key: C517 C25D E408 759D 98A4  C96B 6C8F 74AE 8770 0B7E

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: