On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 07:43:03AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > On 04/09/11 at 16:25 -0700, Ryan Niebur wrote: > > Hi Francesco, > > > > On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 11:53:59PM +0200, Francesco Poli wrote: > > > > > > > > I've uploaded a new version of dpkg-ruby, so libdpkg-ruby1.8 can > > > > be replaced by dpkg-ruby (>= 3.7.7). > > > > > > Hi Ryan! > > > > > > Shouldn't it be ruby-dpkg, rather than dpkg-ruby, according to the new > > > Ruby Debian package naming scheme? > > > > > > > Yeah, I debated a bit about this. > > > > There was already the package dpkg-ruby, containing the scripts > > dpkg-ruby and dpkg-checkdeps. I assume that these are used by some > > people because popcon says there are 141 installs (and this is all > > that was in that package before). > > > > I considered the options of having a "dpkg-ruby" package, a > > "ruby-dpkg" package, or both. It seemed confusing to move the tool > > named "dpkg-ruby" to a package named "ruby-dpkg", and it also seemed > > confusing to have both a "dpkg-ruby" and "ruby-dpkg" package, so I > > left it as "dpkg-ruby". > > > > Anyways, I'm open to changing this decision if people agree that I made > > the wrong one. I expected that I could have. > > I think that it's better to switch to the new "standard" naming scheme and > get rid of all alternative naming schemes. Please introduce a > transitional package. >
That probably makes more sense since most of the users of this package are using it as a library apt-listbugs is using. Though I think it should be renamed to "ruby-debian" instead, since the library is all under the debian namespace. I'm guessing the original maintainer named it libdpkg-ruby to match the script's package name. I'll make this change. --
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
