Re: GNUStep namespace pollution in Debian?

[Nicolas Roard]

Le 12 juin 04, à 15:53, Eric Heintzmann a écrit :

>                 Hi everybody,
>
> It seems that most debian users/maintainers don't like the over 
> general names of some GNUstep apps.

(snip)

> Incriminated packages are :
>
> addresses
> clipbook
> terminal
> imageviewer
> camera
> charmap
> textedit
> viewpdf
> preferences
>
> Eric
>
> P.S.
> To avoid misunderstanding, I want to add that nobody has asked for 
> GNUstep apps renaming, just for GNUstep debian package renaming.

Which, imho, is a bit strange. The "binary" namespace is a scarciest 
resource than package name, so if the binary names are ok, it's kinda 
strange to want to rename packages. And of course the "binary" 
namespace is only polluted because debian add scripts to call GNUstep 
apps (while normally you'll use open or openapp).

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.

What I find a bit curious is to want to package every gnustep apps with 
gnustep-* (or even stupider, gnustep-client-*) and not wanting to do 
that for kde, gnome, qt, gtk, fox, etc. It's not like *all* non-gnustep 
apps begins with a K or a G, some KDE/GNOME apps have quite general 
names as well. And some GNUstep apps doesn't have descriptive names, so 
what will you do ? Package them anyway as gnustep-appname ?

A better solution imho would be to add ".app" to GNUstep apps names 
rather than prefixing with gnustep- .

--
Nicolas Roard