On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Ansgar Burchardt <ans...@43-1.org> wrote: > Hi, > > Ansgar Burchardt <ans...@43-1.org> writes: > >> the Debian Perl Policy asks for packages for the Foo::Bar module to be >> named libfoo-bar-perl [1]. Some packages do not adhere to this scheme: >> > [...] >> >> Unless there are objections I will file bugs of severity "normal" in a >> few days for these packages. > > The bugs are now filed with severity "wishlist" and user-tagged. > A list can be obtained from [1]. > > Regards, > Ansgar > > [1] > <http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?tag=perl-naming-policy;users=ans...@2008.43-1.org> > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87zl1ppxte....@marvin.43-1.org > >
Philosophical question: When does this sort of thing get taken care of? In twenty years, will Debian (if it's still going) have myriad misnamed libraries? I know one can Shouldn't housecleaning like this be of higher priority, especially say, when a new version has just been put out? That way, maintainers would have months to slowly work on one package (and its associated reverse-dependencies) at a time. I do not know the technical constraints (no autobuild, etc), but consistency is a valuable trait of an operating system. -- Luke L. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/c1775fd41003301204k21a4f8f5yf9fe76330ee4a...@mail.gmail.com
