On 07/21/2012 02:59 AM, Don Armstrong wrote: > I understand now that you aren't planning on ever wanting to use it as a > package name,
yes. > but it also means that no one else will ever be able to use it as a > package name. that's ok. in the past six years, we have consistently used 'debian-live' to refere to the project, always and everywhere, and using this as a package name does not ever make sense, not even in future :) having said this already three years ago in the first reply in http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=544192#17 and, nothing changed since then, just shows that we really are sure of not ever wanting to use a package called 'debian-live'. hence, to word it explicitly again, our choice of name for the pseudo-package would then be 'debian-live'. > I'm also going to assume that the correct maintainer address for the > psuedopackage is debian-live@lists.debian.org? yes. > And the description should be something like: > > General problems with systems running Debian Live since debian live is not a component of a system but more a type of systems, it would probably make more sense to use the following wording: "General problems with Debian Live systems" > Once the name is settled, I'll create the pseudopackage. great, thanks. -- Address: Daniel Baumann, Donnerbuehlweg 3, CH-3012 Bern Email: daniel.baum...@progress-technologies.net Internet: http://people.progress-technologies.net/~daniel.baumann/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-live-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/500a034a.2010...@progress-technologies.net
