On 02/07/07, Alberto Ruiz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2007/7/2, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I don't think anyone is forgetting this is a community effort. The
> > current naming standards for Solaris were chosen so 3rd parties could
> > work together with Sun with less problems.
>
> Well, I think that adding a meaningful word to the package is way more
> useful than the provider itself. And the same time, most people, will try to
> push their packages mainstream, so there is no such concept of provider in
> most of the packages, so is better to have a general purpose conflict
> resolution convention rather than one that was designed with enterprise
> purposes within the Solaris context.
>
>
> > That would imply the current conventions are not sane, which is not
> > true. The current conventions were not chose arbitrarily, but rather
> > with purpose and great reasoning.
>
> Okay, just a snippet of the output of `pkginfo | awk {'print $2'}`:
...
> Do you call this sanity? Does it makes any sense? Now, do `dpkg -l | awk
> {'print $2'}` and compare the differences on the meaningfulness of most
> packages from both sides. (Of course, if the project name is cryptic
> already, that's not a package naming issue).
Yes, and yes. But since that is in the eye of the beholder, I digress.
The names were chosen with purpose and reason. They may not make sense
to you, but I think you already know that there isn't much that has
happened in Solaris/OpenSolaris without good reason.
As I mentioned before, backwards compatibility is something the
OpenSolaris community has indicated they value. As such, arbitrary
changes to package naming because of perceived unfriendliness is
inevitably difficult to justify.
Perhaps package naming is something that can be done, but I would
rather see it redone working with Sun instead of choosing to break
compatibility at such an early stage.
Besides, breaking compatibility at this early of a stage would only
increase the headaches involved with getting the project started...
--
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it. " --Donald Knuth
_______________________________________________
indiana-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
