Tilo Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thursday 07 October 2004 10:09, Frank Küster wrote: >> Tilo Schwarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > On Monday 04 October 2004 20:23, Frank Küster wrote: >> >> I must have missed this thread... What is ".bundle" meant to >> >> indicate? >> > >> > On NeXT-Step systems the ".bundle" suffix of a directory indicates >> > a dynamically linkable module (basically like a shared lib). >> >> Is Debian a NeXT-Step system? I guess not. Does ".bundle" have any >> meaning to our *users*? I guess no. >> >> It doesn't really matter whether you can teach the readers of ITP's >> on debian-devel what ".bundle" means. The question is whether we >> serve our users with what I would call a "cryptic name" for at least >> 90% of them. > > The intention of my answer was not to argue concerning the gnustep > naming issue in any direction - I couldn't care less. The answer > doesn't contain a single word regarding the naming discussion. > > The intention was to answer what I thought was a question of you: > >> >> I must have missed this thread... What is ".bundle" meant to >> >> indicate?
The misunderstanding is that, since bundle has a meaning for developers (in a GNUstep context), you read it as 'What is a ".bundle"'. I must admit that I wasn't really interested in the answer. What I meant was: 'What is the message you want to send to the user by naming a package "foo.bundle" instead of "foo"'. It seems to me the answer is: "There is no message". So my comment is: Why not keep it out of the name (after choosing a sensible name for the application in the first place)? Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
