On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 05:11:45PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote: > > > > 'linux' is a perfect name for the package. The tarballs contain that very > > name. > > Note that the name is choosen not only to attract the user, but also to > catch that who blindly use "apt-get source linux". The user wouldn't get > the well-known and good kernel-source packages but something which is > under control of Robert. Further, what they would get is not a clean > source but something with debian/ dir inside which would confuse > make-kpkg. I would not mind if he had called it "linux-rmh" or such.
That means you find 99% of packages in Debian to be unclean. Now it's your turn to start a crusade to solve that problem. But don't start with me. > > Are you implying that you make up names for the software that you package, > > rather than use the name given to it by upstream? I believe you don't. > > Ah, that is a good base to start a discussion. Of course it is better to > keep the upstreams name but make exceptions if they are too generic, to > confusing or to offensive (though we did already accept such ones, eg. > "pornview" ;)). As I said before, you should discuss this with upstream. -- Robert Millan "[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work." -- J.R.R.T, Ainulindale (Silmarillion)
