Re: Bug#1103848: ruby-rails-propshaft: package name should be ruby-propshaft

2025-04-23 Thread Soren Stoutner
On Wednesday, April 23, 2025 7:07:02 AM Mountain Standard Time Antonio Terceiro wrote: > AFAICT there is no strictly technical reason to name it > ruby-propshaft, but following the established convention makes it > simpler for us humans. OK. I will make the change once things open up after the t

Re: ruby-rails-propshaft: package name should be ruby-propshaft

2025-04-23 Thread Antonio Terceiro
On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 02:12:32PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote: > > On 23/04/2025 1:49 pm, Soren Stoutner wrote: > > The thought process with the name is that this package is only useful > > to rails. It can’t be used generally by other Ruby packages. > > > > Upstream is propshaft inside of the

Re: ruby-rails-propshaft: package name should be ruby-propshaft

2025-04-23 Thread Pirate Praveen
On 23/04/2025 1:49 pm, Soren Stoutner wrote: The thought process with the name is that this package is only useful to rails. It can’t be used generally by other Ruby packages. Upstream is propshaft inside of the rails project. Only golang follows that convention because you have to also impo