https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1179982 --- Comment #13 from Raphael Groner <projects.rg@xxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Simon Farnsworth from comment #12) … > Oh, and a side note; while I'm not happy with "docsis" as a package name, I > have no problem with the binary that comes out of it being named "docsis". > My goal is just to make sure that "yum search docsis" is clear about what > the package does; binary names can be the same as upstream if that makes > your life easier. It won't be a good idea to rename the package itself but keep the legacy name for the binary. This may probably confuse the user surely and could bring trouble in future when there are more packages named alike with partly docsis. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. 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