Author:
Date: Jan 2, 2008 05:40
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 00:58:12 -0200, MartÃn Ferrari wrote:
> On Jan 2, 2008 12:28 AM, Russ Allbery debian.org> wrote:
>> This is a Policy proposal that's sat in the Policy bug queue with wording
>> and seconds for quite some time. I'd like to resurrect it and resolve it
>> one way or the other.
> I think the proposal is a good technical solution to the problem: I
> really want to still be able to apt-get install
> libbusiness-onlinepayment-bankofamerica-perl, I don't need to think
> twice to find it.
Count me in -- I appreciate the simple mapping of Foo::Bar to
libfoo-bar-perl, too.
> But, is this really a problem? I don't completely grasp the benefit of
> using reduced names for libraries. Also, there is the problem of
> assigning good names.
Ack.
But I don't oppose to the policy change, as long as the "fancy" names
are optional and the "real" names are required to be in a Provides
field (and that's the way I read the proposal).
> Call me a consistency freak :)
|