On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 12:50:53PM +0000, Mike Gabriel wrote: > On Sa 07 Jun 2014 03:09:58 CEST, Adam Borowski wrote: > >Package: mate-desktop-environment > > > >Hi! > > > >Back in the day, this kind of metapackages used to be named > >foo-desktop-environment. This is no more, yet I see that for some reason > >MATE uses this old scheme. > > > >I'd say this is both inconsistent and confusing. A package named > >"mate-desktop" exists, yet it's not what one would expect. On the other > >hand, other desktop environments' metapackages are named: > > gnome > > lxde > > kde-standard > > xfce4 xfce4-goodies > >As 3/4 of these use just their short name, I'd suggest using just "mate" as > >well. > > I have been wondering about the reason of other packaging teams for > dropping that old naming scheme for desktop shell meta packages, as > I think it makes more sense than those short names we currently have > in Debian. > > If there is a consensus on such short names, I will follow that > consensus and rename bin:packages of the meta src:package > mate-desktop-environment. > > However, if it is just a matter of trendyness, I'd offer adding > "Provides: mate" resp. "Provides: mate-core", resp. "Provides: > mate-extras" to the different bin:package in src:package > mate-desktop-environment as a solution while keeping the current > bin:package names. > > Feedback? Comments?
Probably the best place to colour bikesheds like this is -devel, let's see what folks have to say. My arguments for just "mate" are: * requires less searching from the user * no confusion with "mate-desktop" but your idea of using Provides: has some merit, too. Meow! -- Gnome 3, Windows 8, Slashdot Beta, now Firefox Ribbon^WAustralis. WTF is going on with replacing usable interfaces with tabletized ones? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140607144800.ga30...@angband.pl
