On Tue, 2006-05-09 at 10:52 +0200, Terje Bless wrote: > Mike A. Harris <mharris@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >- indicate that the software is an official part of the X.Org X11 > >distribution > > Perhaps symptomatic of the rationale being insufficiently mnemonic. :-) > > > I know my expectation of a common packaging prefix is a) one of namespace and b) > imposed by the distribution (not upstream). This implies that perl-* packages > are all packages that the distributor deems related to Perl (modules, supporting > utilities, etc.) but excepting "applications" that happen to be implemented in > Perl. I would hold similar expectations for python-* and java-*. > > In the xorg-x11-* case I would definitely expect a driver, say, in this > namespace to be in that namespace _because_ it is compatible with and > supporting, extending, or augmenting "xorg-x11". > > However, I would certainly understand — and possibly also advocate — that a > suitable entity is given authority over a given namespace to avoid clashes. The name spaces are important. There's in issue being discussed in extras right now because the muse add-on for emacs was simply named muse - and not emacs-muse Now there is a piece of software that SHOULD be called muse, but because the emacs namespace was not used - there is already a package called muse. > > This latter should not require trademark protection to enforce within a > distribution, but it may be X is a special case and with additional requirements > to reflect its more cross-distribution needs. I think if documentation is clear that the xorg is there to designate a namespace, there shouldn't be a problem. The namespace-name does not indicate that the package is part of the namespace project. > > > BTW, this isn't an argument that one or another set of packages should be > renamed. I think, rather, that I conclude Fedora needs to come up with a general > namespace policy that ensure _all_ namespaces have the same underlying semantics > and then take whatever suitable steps to bring the distribution into compliance > with that. Agreed. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
