----- "Pierre-Yves Chibon" <pingou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Some reviewers already tried to harmonize this: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710386#c1 > > Using this approach: > """ > These extensions were built as subpackages of the main package > "gnome-shell-extensions", and so named > "gnome-shell-extensions-<foo>", > as defined in the guidelines. > It seemed logical to me to refer to "third-party" extensions under > the > name "gnome-shell-extension-<bar>", since the package would provide > only > one extension "a priori". Maybe we'll need to specify guidelines for > such extensions, becoming more numerous. > """ > (see comment 3 of the same bug report). > > This sounds like a valid approach to me. > A single element is not plural. End users are not going to know the difference between the "subpackages of the main package" and third party extensions, until this moment I did not so I had to look in to it myself. It seems the the "extensions" name is coming from the git repo where gnome has multiple extensions stored/developed. On the GnomeShell Extensions[1] page it describes the "gnome-shell-extension-tool" again a single extension with out the plural name. [1] https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Extensions -- Bob ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Robert 'Bob' Jensen || Fedora Unity Founder | | bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx || http://fedoraunity.org/ | | http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/ | | http://blogs.fedoraunity.org/bobjensen | | http://www.facebook.com/rpjensen | ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
