Andrius Merkys <merkys@debian.org> writes: > Hi Simon, > > On 2025-11-26 11:06, Simon Josefsson wrote: >> Hi. Do you think there is still any point to avoid using 'bingo' here? >> There is no naming clash. While we could rename this source and/or >> binary package, the Go team naming policy is to use the upstream name, >> which is 'bingo', and I can't see that there will ever be any conflict >> with your 'libbingo*' namespace here. >> https://go-team.pages.debian.net/packaging.html#_naming_conventions >> So my preference is to go with the Go naming guideline here. Let me >> know if you still think it would be useful to avoid 'bingo' here. I >> plan to upload to NEW shortly. > > I did not have time to look into src:indigo. Thus feel free to upload > src:bingo if it does not interfere with bin:libbingo*. It is unlikely > src:indigo will interfere with the namespace you are intending to > take. Per [1], bingo is described as "Chemistry search engine for > Oracle, Microsoft SQL Server and PostgreSQL databases", thus it is > unlikely there will ever be a need for /usr/bin/bingo. Thank you for reply! Looking at that repository, it seems clear that 'bingo' is an internal implementation name, and the upstream project is called 'indigo' and I agree it feels unlikely that bingo/ will ever provide a /usr/bin/bingo binary. Still, if that where to happen, we can solve that later... I'll proceed with the upload after newgateway review. /Simon > Best, > Andrius > > [1] https://github.com/epam/Indigo >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature