https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554101 Christopher Meng <cickumqt@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Flags|needinfo?(cassmodiah@fedora | |project.org) | Last Closed|2011-03-22 18:28:28 |2014-04-11 01:54:04 --- Comment #32 from Christopher Meng <cickumqt@xxxxxxxxx> --- Sorry for this belated reply, I'm busy recently but I immediately read the email from bugzilla when I first received it. (In reply to Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski from comment #31) > Almost three years without any action on this? Maybe the current maintainer > can take care of the rename. Ooops, I won't do that. Let me show my opinion here: I glanced and found that the timestamp of that tar archive in comment 10 was from 2005, well it's 2014 now. A nearly abandoned project if you ask me about it when I saw the first link you provided. But then Simon pointed out the aur package and I checked again, alright it's another software. Now in Fedora it's called surf-geometry, see bug 840244(I assume that you've known it, right?). Latest version of it was from 2010. Ooops again, 4 years later, this bug is still open? Surf web browser is still being developed(not rapid releasing mode). Last version was released in Oct 2013. Having a look at the search results of "surf" amid distros: ======================================================== http://pkgs.org/download/surf RED TEAM: 2 seats || OpenMandriva + ROSA. They have packaged your "surf". BLU TEAM: 6 seats (if you agree that Ubuntu is a distro actually :D), plus looking at Gentoo, they packaged the browser surf as well, but since gentoo portage is another different mechanism, I will not include it. ;) No BSD please, different world. ======================================================== You should advise surf upstream(for your "surf", if the upstream is still alive or active) to rename their project, sometimes inventing(or, excogitating, whatever) a proper name is so easy(arbitrary, isn't it?) that they even don't care about the sequel. If people enjoy formulating their ideas in few alphabets, well, let they be. I don't quite understand the plan. Rename the surf to surf-browser, then place the surf-geometry into the surf slot? I think it's impossible, RPM obsoletes will not work. It's also dangerous to place a completely different software to the same name in one single distro. Therefore I guess you all want to do: surf -> surf-browser; retire surf slot in pkgdb; do nothing with the surf-geometry. Sounds true. Wait! Why should I do this? Rationality? Just because a name conflict? Don't you think it's futile and a kind of wasting time? One sentence: "Hello everyone, why should I rename a package already in Fedora for years but can't do anything after that for the existing name created in pkgdb?" Chances are finite, first come first served, Jason tried to prove that "well it's not always right". But the fact is true, you were late. FESCo ticket is a paradox IMO again, you can't do anything to the existing "surf" after the rename. Crux here. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review