Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I looked through the output of 'dpkg -l' on one of my systems and
> > > saw very few packages with plain English names.
> >
> > And this is significant because ... ?
>
> Because it demonstrates that most people thing plain English
> names are too generic and therefore not suitable for package names.
No it doesn't, it simply illustrates that no one has chosen a `plain
English name' for a package. That no one has chosen such name implies
nothing about their reasoning.
If you wish to argue that a particular name is unsuitable you can do so
based on the name, or to some relevant category to which it belongs --
for instance `editor' is unsuitable because it obviously applies to
many, many packages, and so is too generic -- but the category `English
names' is simply too broad to say much about.
As I said before `water' is fairly unique, because it refers to a
physical thing, rather than an action or an actor that performs some
action. It is unlikely to cause any problems.
Morever, a common attribute of demos, which exist mainly to entertain
and impress, is that they have striking names, and I think most people
would agree that `water' is far cooler that `water-demo'.
-Miles
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
