On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:00 AM, The Wanderer <wande...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > Might I suggest a different package name, e.g. 'ntop-ng'? > > At a glance, 'ntopng' reads to me as "N-to-PNG", along the lines of > existing file-format converter programs. While it's not absolutely > necessary to avoid that, if there's no real downside to doing so, it > might be a good idea.
Good point about the double interpretation, I did not think about it. However, given that there is no real conflict, I would like to keep the name as close as possible to upstream. > I'm also not sure how good "-ng"-style names are in the first place, > unless you are positive that there will never be a future "next" > generation after this one; a name like "ntop2" would be more > forward-development-compatible in that light. But that's just my > principles speaking, not a source of present confusion. This is a good point too, but I am sure upstream put the appropriate thought in it. I would not like to change the upstream name. What if I call it now ntop2 and in a couple of years upstream releases ntop2? :) Thanks, Ludovico -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caek95ggdtfm28ocsmkgx+gpmrk6eueuzdbjqrbrw6aqiy2v...@mail.gmail.com
