On Thu, 2016-06-02 at 13:03 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > 2016-06-02 11:24 GMT+02:00 Bastien Nocera <had...@hadess.net>: > > gnome-games package in your distribution "gnome-games-app". There's > > already prior art in that case with epiphany, the web browser vs. > > the > > game. > > Right, I hope we don't repeat that mistake. That name conflict is > rather painful and confusing. > Let's not repeat that if we can avoid it. > > Reading gnome-games, I expect a collection of games, thh.
And for gnome-photos you expect a collection of photos? > Given > Adrien's explanations, I think gnome-game-manager or gnome-video- > games > would be much more suitable. The application is part of the "Finding and Reminding" collection of applications for GNOME. It would appear as "Games" in GNOME. Once you namespace it, it's gnome-games. Call the package what you want, it doesn't matter, users should be able to install this application through Software. Or, even better, distributors would ship it in Games, and point towards the Games section of Software when you have no games installed. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
