1 |
do we have an established naming policy for ebuilds, and where can i |
2 |
find it? |
3 |
|
4 |
my gripe is that when i submitted the ebuild for a program named "balsa" |
5 |
(under app-sci/tbass) several devs told me i could not name it balsa |
6 |
because the gnome email client balsa already uses that name. i believed |
7 |
that is why apps were listed under app-sci, dev-db, etc... which is why |
8 |
this structure existed in the first place. i was told however this was |
9 |
not so and that this wasn't allowed. in the end the ebuild was called |
10 |
tbass which is very non-intuitive having a ebuild named something very |
11 |
dissimilar to its common name. |
12 |
|
13 |
all was fine untill i went to install ocaml and did emerge -s ocaml only |
14 |
to find there are TWO packages named ocaml that co-exist seemingly |
15 |
happily in different categories. this brings back my original question |
16 |
of if we have a specific naming policy or if some of the dev's are |
17 |
mistaken about things. |
18 |
|
19 |
if we don't have a naming policy yet, should we? it seems as if naming |
20 |
issues are becoming more significant now that the number of packages in |
21 |
portage continues to grow. |
22 |
|
23 |
any thoughts? |
24 |
dave |