On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 00:58:12 -0200, Martín Ferrari wrote: > On Jan 2, 2008 12:28 AM, Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is a Policy proposal that's sat in the Policy bug queue with wording > > and seconds for quite some time. I'd like to resurrect it and resolve it > > one way or the other. > I think the proposal is a good technical solution to the problem: I > really want to still be able to apt-get install > libbusiness-onlinepayment-bankofamerica-perl, I don't need to think > twice to find it.
Count me in -- I appreciate the simple mapping of Foo::Bar to libfoo-bar-perl, too. > But, is this really a problem? I don't completely grasp the benefit of > using reduced names for libraries. Also, there is the problem of > assigning good names. Ack. But I don't oppose to the policy change, as long as the "fancy" names are optional and the "real" names are required to be in a Provides field (and that's the way I read the proposal). > Call me a consistency freak :) Call me more conservative than I'd like to be :) Cheers, gregor -- .''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ | gpg key ID: 0x00F3CFE4 : :' : debian: the universal operating system - http://www.debian.org/ `. `' member of https://www.vibe.at/ | how to reply: http://got.to/quote/ `- NP: Dire Straits: Money For Nothing
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
