On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 07:55:03 +0000, Per Hallsmark wrote: > > Hi Suresh, > > Yes, your analyse is right on the spot. Perhaps I was a bit unclear.
Per, you were asking the developer(s) of Vim to change a name in the package structure of Vim somewhere, may I politely ask you to not top-post then? :) Thanks. :) > As for the current solution, after uncompress/untar I do a move of > dir to match the tarball (mv vim71 vim-7.1). > The downside is that there has to be a special case for vim, no > matter what logic is used to match tarball name and unpacked dir. I see what you mean. When we unpack Vim-X.y a directory vimXy/ is created. To meet the world standard we could either have a different toplevel name in the package to match Vim-X.y, *or* rename the package Vim-X.y into VimXy so that it matches the name of the toplevel directory. > Change the name scheme on the tarball is also fine, <proj><ver>.tar.bz2 > As Suresh points out, it is the consistency of tarball name and its > unpacked dir I would like to see. So, say e.g. that we would be renaming the package names from Vim-X.y.tar to VimXy.tar, then some questions could be: Would this be a problem for the system that is generating those tarballs? Furthermore, if it's necessary that the current/old packages should be renamed, in what places (e.g. websites) would that be? > As said originally, it's only a small request I'm hoping there are also small consequences... ;-) Of course, changing something in a build script will break something else, but I'm quite certain this can be fixed. Adri --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
