On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 01:25 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>>> "VS" == Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@xxxxxx> writes: > > > > VS> And by the way, in my opinion the discussion should not be only > > VS> about Unicode, but about restricting package names even to a > > VS> subset of ASCII (let's say eg. a-z, A-Z, 0-9, -, +, _, .). > > > > This is why we need a concrete proposal to vote on. Things would have > > gone much better if we had one. > > > +1 > > One of the problems I have with "ban packages with unicode names" is > that it doesn't consider what to do when a package name upstream is > non-ASCii. Transliterate/translate them to ASCII. > My -1 vote is really a vote against having the Fedora > packager make up a name for an upstream package which I very strongly > oppose. Why would this be a problem? May-be this is a problem with "pictographic" charsets (May-be traditional Chinese), but I am having difficulties to imagine this to be a problem elsewhere, because most (all?) languages have an nominal transliteration/translation to ASCII. > If a proposal were written that told what the packager needs to > do to get an acceptable package name I'd likely abstain or (possibly) agree. I agree that requesting such a name from upstream is advisable, but making it mandatory to me qualifies as bureaucracy. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
