Hi, quim....@nokia.com wrote: > What is really the problem? Apart from the fact that it is not good > practice to carry the names of distros in package names of generic apps > and libraries, it is not evident (at least to me) where the problems > really rely.
More than "not good practice" - it's brand dilution. MeeGo is a distribution, not a library or an application or a netbook GUI. That story is easy to understand, and we should ensure that it reflects reality. > Packages using the "meego" string in the MeeGo releases seem to fall in these > categories: > > * Applications developed by the MeeGo project within the UX > categories. In general it is not a good practice to tie an open source > app with the name of a distro. Also the "MeeGo" word doesn't appear in > the UX of these apps. Should we consider the renaming of those packages, > removing "meego" from them? Yes, definitely. Applications should not be "MeeGo anything". To draw a parallel, GNOME games are games for GNOME, and also games from GNOME. But we don't have an issue with someone saying "GNOME Games on Ubuntu". Ubuntu One, on the other hand, will have trouble being adopted anywhere else because of the distro name in the client application name. Going beyond applications, it would be really useful if the UX layer of the netbook UX specifically had a name other than MeeGo. That is, the collection of window manager, default user interface, panels, menus, settings apps, all the basic plumbing. Call that "Flubberdubby" or whatever, and you'll se people calling their MeeGo derived distros "OpenSuse Flubberdubby Edition" or "Debian Flubberdubby Edition". The MeeGo equivalent of GNOME or KDE. (*) > * Packages related with the MeeGo Touch Framework. The branding of > this framework was discussed and agreed, causing the actual renaming of > the components (previously libdui). There is no problem in other distros > willing to use the MeeGo Touch Framework. Is it clear the situation of > branding and icons, though? Are they in isolated packages? The only issue might be if you had an issue with other distros shipping MeeGo Touch. If you don't, I don't see a problem. Still, I don't see any reason for naming the framework after the distro if it is potentially useful to others. It's sufficiently hidden from the user that it doesn't really matter, though (as with all ther other library packages). > * Upstream packages with specific MeeGo version/configuration. Not a big > deal, between not useful or not problematic for other distros. > * Packages intrinsically related to the MeeGo distro (configuration, > branding, devtools). Not useful in the context of other distros. I don't know if there are a lot of either of these - obviously things specific to MeeGo can have the MeeGo name. For upstream, I would rather encourage another naming convention - "netbook" maybe? Or "flubberdubby"? In any case, I agree it's not a major issue. People target UXes, not distros. > Progress in this discussion is measured in improvements to the current > documentation and bugs filed/solved. If you file any bugs about this please > CC me. Thanks! Cheers, Dave. (*) I am not recommending calling the netbook UX Flubberdubby. -- maemo.org docsmaster Email: dne...@maemo.org Jabber: bo...@jabber.org _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list MeeGo-dev@meego.com http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
