Axel Thimm wrote:
Hi, Should packages with source from outside of the xorg-x11 tree carry this prefix (e.g. ivtv, nvidia, ati, etc)? E.g. is this a prefix like often used "for <prefix>" or is it a cendor prefix, e.g. "by <prefix>"?
No, they should not use the xorg-x11 prefix, nor Xorg, etc. Only software which is officially released by the X.Org foundation should contain the X.Org name/trademark, etc. as far as I understand.
How would a 3rd party driver package be best named?
For the other open source drivers we include for the Xorg server which are not part of the Xorg X11 distribution itself, we name them the same name their upstream project uses. ie: The "linuxwacom" project provides the "linuxwacom" driver, which we package as "linuxwacom" rpm package name. The same thing is done for the synaptics input driver, as it is also not part of X.Org X11. There is currently no standardization outside of X.Org as to how to name driver CVS/git/svn/etc. repositories, nor tarball names, rpm package names, etc. so it is more or less up to the project or vendor how to name their software. It is recommended though to avoid using the X.Org name both to clearly indicate to users that the software is not part of the X.Org project, and to honour the X.Org trademark.[1]
xorg-x11-drv-<driver> or <3rd-party-vendor>-drv-<driver>?
Not xorg-x11-drv-*, as that suggests to users that the software came from X.Org, which is untrue if the software did not come from X.Org. Any other naming is probably sufficient, such as: fglrx-$version-$release.src.rpm nvidia-$version-$release.src.rpm etc.. -- Mike A. Harris * Open Source Advocate * http://mharris.ca Proud Canadian. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
