Hello Jonas, Thanks for your quick followup and thoughts.
On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 03:59:34PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: [...] > ...but then next year new shiny upstream project "dot" gets packaged not > as "dot-lv2" but "dot" because there is a precedence for lv2 packages to > use no affix. There's no such precedence. I've now renamed the *binary* package to bankstown-lv2, to somewhat align with the precedence of lv2 plugins currently in debian. [...] > Why do you call it mangling to pick another of upstream's multiple > names? They chose one name at crates.io and another at Github. In my experience it is constant hassle to get debian tooling to line up properly with a different name than what the source of the orig tarball calls it. The github tarball is called bankstown. Still not convinced renaming the source is worth it. How strongly do you feel using plain bankstown for source is a problem? (Atleast it's not a three letters acronym, unlike some other recently uploaded packages.) > > And why do you find it important to align source package name with > source package name of (non-derived) distros? If you think derivates are more important to consider than non-derivates you can simply replace Fedora Asahi Remix with Ubuntu Asahi. Regards, Andreas Henriksson
