Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508750 --- Comment #10 from David A. Wheeler <dwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-01-25 13:34:44 EST --- Re: comment 7 - I agree, it's better to explicitly list the egg in %files so that future failures will be caught. And we both agree it's GPLv2+. I disagree about the name "trash"; I think it should be /usr/bin/trash. Yes, the guidelines recommend caution for short names, and I agree with those guidelines. But I think the idea here is that trash is to make this the *standard* name for this functionality... changing it to "trash-put" will diminish its utility as a standard name across distros. Note, for example, that Debian uses the name "trash" for the executable of this very package, and Debian has at least as many naming-conflict concerns as Fedora: http://packages.debian.org/lenny/all/trash-cli/filelist Ubuntu also calls it "trash": http://packages.ubuntu.com/jaunty/all/trash-cli/filelist If there are eventually multiple programs named "trash", we can make them alternatives and invoke the alternatives setup. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review