On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 23:46 -0400, Benj. Mako Hill wrote: > <quote who="Don Armstrong" date="Thu, May 17, 2007 at 05:30:57PM -0700"> > > On Thu, 17 May 2007, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > After discussing with upstream, I'm complying with the trademark licence > > > conditions by "prominent version qualifiers and notices of possible > > > out-datedness" rather than renaming. Specifically, for a fresh > > > installation, the postinst checks the upstream version (using uscan) and > > > if the version being installed is out of date (or may be out of date, > > > since the version check failed) it notes that it will not be supported > > > upstream and requires acknowledgement of this. > > > > I suggest just getting around this issue by: > > > > 1) renaming the actual package and command "iron"[1] or whatever you > > choose so that it can stay in main > > > > 2) making a non-free transition package called ion3 which depends on > > the new package, has the symlink, and contains the annoying postinst. > > Yes, please rename the package and include a non-free transition > package. I do not currently use any packages in non-free and really > don't want to turn it on for this since it can be so easily avoided.
Firstly, I do not want to maintain a renaming patch. There are many separate instances of "Ion" and "Ion3" in documentation, messages, etc. I believe this would be a continuing maintenance chore. Secondly, I believe Tuomo would object to the transition package. "apt-get install ion3" would install a heavily modified (by renaming) and possibly outdated version of Ion. Finally, I don't think it would serve current and potential users of Ion on Debian to rename it. We just about get away with Iceweasel as that controversy was widely publicised and the package is part of a standard desktop installation. For any more obscure application I fear renaming means death for the package; users won't find it. (On the other hand, you could argue this is true for non-free packages. I don't really know how many users are aware of or have enabled use of the non-free section.) > FWIW, I like the name fission. That's been vetoed, as I expect would "iron" be. I find the claim over anything referring to "ion" to be tenuous but I do not wish to antagonise the author. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings It is easier to change the specification to fit the program than vice versa.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
