Thanks Rick. > There's some prior art to this in the archive
I think it would really be good for the server team to follow up on this naming convention and get some agreement across the distro (not only for server team maintained packages), as we don't want different teams/people coming up with different naming conventions/styles for the same problem. And then it would be great if it was documented somewhere, maybe at https://packaging.ubuntu.com/html/packaging-new-software.html and/or we could add it to the MIR wiki page (though MIR isn't really the only, or even correct, time for package binary deb naming to be evaluated). Also note that while 'base' and 'extra' might have been used before, you might not have seen Seth's comment 7 that indicated it didn't turn out very well for apparmor, so maybe 'base' and 'extra' aren't the best names, even if they've been used before. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1927004 Title: [MIR] fence-agents To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fence-agents/+bug/1927004/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
