On 19 November 2008 at 09:40, Adam C Powell IV wrote: | Package: wnpp | Severity: wishlist | | Package name: mpi-defaults | Version: 0.1 | Author: Debian Science Team <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | License: Undetermined | | This new source package will produce two binary meta-packages: | default-mpi-dev and default-mpi-bin which depend on libopenmpi-dev and | openmpi-bin respectively on the platforms where they are available, and | lam4-dev and lam-runtime on the others. A third default-mpi-dbg might | also depend on libopenmpi-dbg, though there is no corresponding lam | package. | | Background: | http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2008/10/msg00097.html
Good stuff! The only question I have is with respect to the naming. We sometimes call preferences 'sensible-$FOO'. I don't really like default-mpi-{dev,mpi} because is stresses 'default' as the first word. Apt-get search reveals that we have exactly one precedent in default-java-*. I think we should put either debian or mpi first. How about mpi-default-{dev,bin} or even mpi-debian-default-{dev,bin} to make it even clearer that it is just 'us' (ie Debian) defining a default for us, rather misconstruing that more than two decades (I'm guessing) of competing mpi implementations have ended ? ;-) Comments ? Dirk -- Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]