On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 22:15 +0100, Bruno Postle wrote: > On Wed 05-Sep-2007 at 11:28 +0200, Nils Philippsen wrote: > > > > during the review of the resynthesizer plugin for GIMP > > [ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250210 ], I asked the > > package to be named "gimp-plugin-resynthesizer" rather than > > "gimp-resynthesizer". Ewan brought up the point that there isn't really > > a naming guideline for it, therefore I'd like to propose one: > > > > For packages specific to GIMP (i.e. not just extensions of a separate > > application like xsane, ufraw): > > > > Plugins and scripts(*): "gimp-plugin-<name>" > > Patterns: "gimp-pattern-<name>" > > Brushes: "gimp-brush-<name>" > > Themes: "gimp-theme-<name>" > > This makes sense, but how many patterns, brushes and themes are > there likely to be? I agree that plugins and scripts are all just > 'plugins' to the end-user and shouldn't be differentiated. > > The fact that this is the first gimp plugin in fedora reminds me > that fedora is very weak in this direction - Perhaps an 'imaging > SIG' is needed? Good idea. What do we have to do for that? Nils -- Nils Philippsen / Red Hat / nphilipp@xxxxxxxxxx "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- B. Franklin, 1759 PGP fingerprint: C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F 656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
