On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 15:53 +0200, Sébastien Wilmet wrote: > On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 03:10:59PM +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > Yet this is what you're doing. If you want an application to be > > renamed, you'd better make sure that you can actually come up with > > a > > good name, and argue why it is an insurmountable problem to call > > the > > package "gnome-games-app" or similar in your distribution. > > gnome-games-center ? Like gnome-control-center. > > Anyway, the plugins of gnome-games will maybe be tricky to package. > Isn't a Flatpak sufficient? The purpose of Flatpak is to avoid all > the > duplicated work of packaging in all the distros. I have always seen > that > as a big waste of time. For new apps, does it really make sense to > package them in the traditional manner?
Again, that's not relevant to the discussion about why the "gnome- games" tarball name is a problem for distributions. The flatpak name is "org.gnome.Games". I doubt it conflicts with anything. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
