Re: GNUStep namespace pollution in Debian?

[Wolfgang Sourdeau]

La plume légère, vers Sun, Jun 13, 2004 at 05:04:18PM +0100, heure 
d'inspiration,
Eric Heintzmann écrivait en ces mots:
> >But well, their point of view is nonetheless understandable, it's 
> >also normal 
> >that they want to reserve general names like terminal or preferences 
> >for 
> >meta-packages. And if they want to rename theses packages as 
> >backbone-preferences or backbone-terminal, I don't find it shocking, 
> >as 
> >preferences, terminal or textedit are parts of backbone.

Personnally, one idea that comes to my mind is to not rename those
packages but to keep them organized in a GNUstep category, the same way
there is now a GNOME and a KDE category. Of course it does not solve the
namespace "pollution" problem, but otoh, if for example the package
Terminal.app cannot use the name "terminal", why would another package
be allowed to... so why condemn the use of such names at all.

> >A better solution imho would be to add ".app" to GNUstep apps names 
> >rather 
> >than prefixing with gnustep- .
> 
> Well, this solution doen't satisfy everyone and doesn't solve the 
> naming problem on frameworks (like netclasses) and libs.

netclasse.framework_version.deb ?


Wolfgang

pgpX7qiVJqN6c.pgp
Description: PGP signature