https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1429803 --- Comment #5 from Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > (In reply to Nathan Scott from comment #2) > > Hi Gil, > > > > Oh we were literally working on this in parallel. Wonderful news that > > unit-api exists - it sadly didn't when I started :( - and upstream are > > unaware of your efforts. > > Is really necessary for upstream? No, not necessary (unless you are feeding patches back there, as we have been) - but in this case upstream is very receptive and likes to hear from us packagers. > > I switched to using the upstream unitsofmeasurement project prefix because > > some of the package names are extremely cryptic otherwise (like "uom-se") - > > *shrug* - is this a concern you share, or think its OK with the short names? > > Only if you do not plan or do not know this libraries could be cryptic > I do not see the reason to use your "formula". But this and your law ... Since unit-api exists in pkgdb now, let's stick with the non-unitsofmeasurement-prefixed names everywhere. I'll update the packages and create new bugzillas. Thanks Gil. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx