Götz Waschk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
order is OK, but this is a bit overregulation. I think it's better to
stick to the original name if possible. Else people won't find a
software in the distribution they are looking for and compile it
themselves. The package ordering through the rpm groups
On Sunday 27 July 2003 23:04, Andi Payn wrote:
On Friday 25 July 2003 08:31, Michael Scherer wrote:
Some of them are named
foo-python, and the others are named python-bar.
example adns-python, libxslt-python
vs python-xoltar, python-fam
There are two important distinctions here that
On Mon Jul 28 9:17 +0200, Michael Scherer wrote:
What about to use the name of the import ?
If the name is Xoltar, the problem of how we should name it is different
from the problem of the position of 'python' in the name.
I think that capitalized name of package are unpleasant to read,
On Friday 25 July 2003 08:31, Michael Scherer wrote:
Some of them are named
foo-python, and the others are named python-bar.
example adns-python, libxslt-python
vs python-xoltar, python-fam
There are two important distinctions here that are being missed.
First, adns-python and
On Sun Jul 27 14:04 -0700, Andi Payn wrote:
Second, adns-python and libxslt-python come from the same tarball (or another
tarball on the same project site) as adns and libxslt; python-xoltar is a
project on its own.
Perhaps in this case, it may make sense to have the rpm named
This may not the right moment to discuss about this, but I think we
should set up a naming policy for the rpm.
To give a simple exemple, the python module.
Some of them are named
foo-python, and the others are named python-bar.
example adns-python, libxslt-python
vs python-xoltar,
On Saturday 26 July 2003 14:28, Götz Waschk wrote:
This may not the right moment to discuss about this, but I think we
should set up a naming policy for the rpm.
To give a simple exemple, the python module.
Some of them are named
foo-python, and the others are named python-bar.
Ainsi parlait Michael Scherer :
The package ordering through the rpm groups should be
sufficient.
But, the ordering is only accessible with rpmdrake ( easily accesible ).
nope, urpmi TAB output is ordered too :-)
--
Disks are always full. It is futile to try to get more disk space. Data
Ainsi parlait Götz Waschk :
This may not the right moment to discuss about this, but I think we
should set up a naming policy for the rpm.
To give a simple exemple, the python module.
Some of them are named
foo-python, and the others are named python-bar.
example adns-python,
On Sat 26 Jul 2003 13:10, Guillaume Rousse posted as excerpted below:
Ainsi parlait Michael Scherer :
The package ordering through the rpm groups should be
sufficient.
But, the ordering is only accessible with rpmdrake ( easily accesible ).
nope, urpmi TAB output is ordered too :-)
Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat 26 Jul 2003 13:10, Guillaume Rousse posted as excerpted below:
Ainsi parlait Michael Scherer :
The package ordering through the rpm groups should be
sufficient.
But, the ordering is only accessible with rpmdrake ( easily
accesible ).
Ainsi parlait Han Boetes :
Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat 26 Jul 2003 13:10, Guillaume Rousse posted as excerpted below:
Ainsi parlait Michael Scherer :
The package ordering through the rpm groups should be
sufficient.
But, the ordering is only accessible with
Guillaume Rousse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ainsi parlait Han Boetes :
Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat 26 Jul 2003 13:10, Guillaume Rousse posted as excerpted below:
Ainsi parlait Michael Scherer :
The package ordering through the rpm groups should be
sufficient.
Hi.
This may not the right moment to discuss about this, but I think we
should set up a naming policy for the rpm.
To give a simple exemple, the python module.
Some of them are named
foo-python, and the others are named python-bar.
example adns-python, libxslt-python
vs python-xoltar,
14 matches
Mail list logo
