Le lundi 07 fÃvrier 2005 Ã 22:12 +0100, Dag Wieers a Ãcrit : > On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Anthony Green wrote: > > > On Mon, 2005-02-07 at 05:58 -0500, Build System wrote: > > > beecrypt-4.1.2-1 > > > ---------------- > > > * Sat Feb 05 2005 Jeff Johnson <jbj@xxxxxxx> 4.1.2-1 > > > - upgrade to 4.1.2 > > > - put java components in sub-package. > > > - check that /usr/lib64 is not used on alpha (#146583). > > > > You called this sub-package beecrypt-java. I suggest renaming this to > > something like beecrypt-java-jni. It only contains the JNI C side of > > the beecrypt java library. The library of java code for beecrypt is > > widely known as "beecrypt-java" (google for beecrypt-java-2.0.0.zip). > > beecrypt-java hasn't been packaged yet, but it will surely require this > > beecrypt-java-jni. > > I would suggest java-something as a standard name, just like > python-something, perl-something and other subpackage policies. Please no oh no. Do you imagine the mess if ~ 1000 java-something hit rawhide ? Because we have this number of java packages in jpackage. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
