1 Oct 2009 03:28
Re: Policy §10.4 as a divergence from usptream (renamings to remove extensions like .pl and .sh).
Charles Plessy <plessy <at> debian.org>
2009-10-01 01:28:38 GMT
2009-10-01 01:28:38 GMT
Dear all, my question triggered a lot of answers… In this message, I will first make a few clarifications, then try to summarise, and conclude with my own opition. First, I would like to underline that I am not questionning how applications should be named, or whether Debian maintainer who chose to rename applications whose suffix indicates their language should stop to do so. What I am asking is whether the advantages of renaming always balance the inconveniences in such a systematic way that not renaming is a bug for which there is most often no excuse. Rephrased more formally, I would like the ‘should’ request to rename in the Policy 10.4 to be either softened or removed. Some people expressed opinions in this discussion which either support my point of view [1,2], or suggest that the issue of this debate is open [3,4,5]. [1] http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20090929062143.GA5792 <at> sumost.ca [2] http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/4AC20F1A.1000103 <at> glondu.net [3] http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/87fxa560x9.fsf <at> windlord.stanford.edu [4] http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20090929094727.GA7923 <at> pcpool00.mathematik.uni-freiburg.de [5] http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/1254218108.19307.21.camel <at> shizuru One of the biggest problems of renaming programs is that it breaks systems [6] as well as documentation [7]. In case of online documentation, we can not correct it. [6] http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/1254217244.28005.5.camel <at> fsopti579.F-Secure.com [7] http://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/200909292045.35783.david.goodenough <at> btconnect.com The typical way Debian deals with renaming programs is to keep the original(Continue reading)
RSS Feed