Bug#973822: ITP: dosbox-staging -- DOSBox Staging is a full x86 CPU emulator (independent of host architecture), capable of running DOS programs that require real or protected mode.

[David Heidelberg <david@ixit.cz>]

Hello Ben,

I asked about possibility of changing name and the final reply is [1].

Quoting dreamer:
Right now, we are fighting to convince users (and developers) to move 
on from using a myriad of tiny DOSBox forks (link - very incomplete, 
there are ~50 other dead forks I know of) or maintain their own 
patchsets based on 10-year old 0.74. We have already certain (hard 
thought for) recognition and community formed up - changing name at 
this point will only cause confusion and hurt the project's prospects 
for future.

[1] 
https://github.com/dosbox-staging/dosbox-staging/issues/703#issuecomment-723178233
Best regards
David Heidelberg

On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 21:52, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-11-05 at 17:41 +0100, David Heidelberg wrote:
> [...]
> >  Q: why is this package useful/relevant?
> >  A: Sucessor of DOSBox, which is already inside Debian
> [...]
>
> DOSBox seems to be under active development even though it hasn't had 
> a
> release for a while.  So this is an independent fork, not a successor
> to a dead project.  (If DOSBox had become dead upstream, I would have
> recommended rebasing the existing dosbox source package on DOSBox
> Staging instead.)
>
> I think this name is also misleading.  "DOSBox Staging" sounds like a
> development branch of the original DOSBox project, not an independent
> project.  Are the upstream developers set on using this name or do you
> think they could be persuaded to use something more distinctive?
>
> Ben.
>
> --
> Ben Hutchings
> Humans are not rational beings; they are rationalising beings.