On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 6:57 AM, Russell Dickenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 6:31 PM, Miklos Vajna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 08:16:05AM +0200, CSÉCSY László <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> 2008-09-26 napján Russell Dickenson ezt írta: >>> > Why is the package named "imaging" when the Python package's official >>> > name is "Python Imaging Library"? I understand that the imaging >>> > package will have some git history associated with it. I can't >>> > understand the original name that was given to the package. >> >> That's not a problem - git handles package renames properly. >> >>> /me wondered about this, too - maybe that's why I haven't found it when >>> packaged uniconvertor, and even VMiklos didn't remember it when I asked him. >> >> Um, I don't remember about this discusstion. ;) So, it is named imaging, >> because the upstream name is Imaging and we do not change upstream >> names, apart from lowercasing them. >> >>> Maybe we should have some rules for package names? Like the perl crap? >> >> Maybe, but I don't think so. >> >> Example in most cases: >> >> upstream name | package name >> >> glib-1.x.tar.gz | glib (provides libgobject*.so) >> Glib-* | perl-glib - you can see we can't avoid a rename here >> pygobject-* | pygobject >> >> so, in case of perl, we are forced to do renames, in case of python, we >> are not. Same goes for java. >> >> And yes, I'm aware that we have 22 pkgs named python-foo, but several of >> them (like python-gnutls) are named that way by upstream. >> >> If we really want to do some progress in this area, then I think rox is >> much more problematic: it has package names like 'mouse' or 'menu' :) > > I now understand why "imaging" is named as it is. It's unfortunate > when those upstream give their work names which are generic. It's > makes life more difficult for those downstream - including Frugalware > - when it comes time to package their software. > > I agree that the issue of the rox packages is even worse since there > are many of them and most have generic names. > > I have no idea how this sort of situation might easily be avoided in > future. So for the moment I'll be quite again...
Damn! "So I'll be *quiet* again...". Oops. May you always be Frugal, Russell Dickenson (AKA phayz) _______________________________________________ Frugalware-devel mailing list [email protected] http://frugalware.org/mailman/listinfo/frugalware-devel
