On Wed, 2008-03-05 at 21:26 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote: > On Wednesday 27 February 2008, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 16:58 -0500, Simo Sorce wrote: > > > > If this is really a usability problem I am sure that the proposal to > > > provide an alternate ASCII only name (need rules to determine how you > > > get from non-ASCII to ASCII) is a very good one, even if copy&paste, or > > > other UIs can be used as well. > > > > In bugzilla, I had proposed the opposite: > > Me too. > > > Mandate ASCII-only _package names_ (=> ASCII-only file names), but > > additionally allow alternative (utf-8) "Provides" if desired. > > This still gets my +1. I have no problem with fixing infrastructure for more > UTF-8 awareness though. So do I. > > This would allow GUI tools to display these utf-names, while it would > > help keep things simple for command-line tools. > > I can't think of a use case where it would be desirable for GUI tools to > display anything else but the package's real name as its name. Neither do I. > Dunno if this is what you meant. What I meant was, to allow people to install packages using their "real" non-ASCII file names (e.g. yum install écollier-fonts). As these people had proposed using installer GUIs, I had been referring to GUI-tools in the sentence above. Ralf -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
