On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Orcan Ogetbil wrote: >> From my perspective, I am not convinced about the impact of the >> disaster this package name will create. So far we didn't have SevenZip >> in Fedora. > > We did have the real 7-Zip, the portable version is called p7zip. 7-Zip is > the name of a Window$ application, both GUI and command-line (which we > don't have and will never have), the POSIX command-line-only port (which we > do have) being called p7zip. > > What the "SevenZip" package contains is something which internally calls > itself SevenZip for some reason, but which doesn't even support 7z files > (by itself – it's possible to implement 7z based on it), is a library with > no user interface and isn't called SevenZip anywhere you'd look for a > package's name (the tarball, which is what you're supposed to look at for > the name in most cases according to our packaging guidelines, is > called "lzma" + the version, the web page calls it "LZMA SDK"). If you do a > Google search for "SevenZip", almost all the links are for the application, > not the Java SDK. The first hit I get is the 7-zip.org front page. > That is because of the algorithm the search engine uses. > As I told you on IRC, this is like taking a Java binding or reimplementation > of Phonon and packaging it as "Amarok". > I agree. However many java libraries we have have such special names. Do a "yum search java |grep -v java" As I said before in an email java guidelines do not require a prefix in the name. > The name also fails to reflect the fact that you're only packaging the Java > version of the SDK. The java version of the lzma SDK is called SevenZip by its upstream. So SevenZip is not a far shot for the package name. > Given that the upstream LZMA SDK also supports C, C++ > and C#, the Java one should really have "java" in the package name. > As I said in the IRC, I was totally fine with the names java-lzma, java-lzma-sdk, ... (even though there is no such requirement for a prefix) to the same amount that I am fine with the name SevenZip. I will change the name and resubmit a review request if I receive complaints regarding a confusion from users. For the time being, I just didn't find it worth the effort to make a change in the name. Honestly, I couldn't think of a scenario where this package name will break some system. Orcan PS: Is this really so important? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
