Scott Kitterman dijo [Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 04:34:40PM +0000]: > >> "freebayes" seems like a very generic name for something specific to > >such a > >> narrow field. Maybe freebayes-genetic-variance or some such instead. > > > >I fully agree with your generic name consideration. The software is > >well known in this work field anyway so I'm hesitating a bit to rename > >it. Would you consider this a strong issue that needs to be discussed > >with upstream or is it in a "not nice but acceptable" status? > > I think it should be discussed with upstream, but we have broader > namespace considerations that they may not understand or care about. > > As long as a package search for freebayes returns this in the result > set, I don't think it's critical to have the package name match > exactly the upstream name. > > Not wearing my FTP team hat for this, consider it as a comment from > another DD.
As Scott is not "officially" speaking from the FTP team but just as a DD, I'll chime in here. I think the package name should indicate the field for which it is meant (freebayes-genetic-variance), but I don't think the program name should deviate from upstream; we have had issues such as when node.js was introduced (that 'node' was a name already taken by another program), but I don't think 'freebayes' will be such a contentious program name.
