Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jon Portnoy <avenj@g.o>
To: Dave Nellans <dnellans@×××××××.edu>
Cc: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild naming policy
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:16:51
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] ebuild naming policy by Dave Nellans
They don't coexist happily. It's impossible to say definitively which 
one you'll get when you emerge appname if appname exists in two 
different categories.

On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 05:42:43PM -0600, Dave Nellans wrote:
> do we have an established naming policy for ebuilds, and where can i > find it? > > my gripe is that when i submitted the ebuild for a program named "balsa" > (under app-sci/tbass) several devs told me i could not name it balsa > because the gnome email client balsa already uses that name. i believed > that is why apps were listed under app-sci, dev-db, etc... which is why > this structure existed in the first place. i was told however this was > not so and that this wasn't allowed. in the end the ebuild was called > tbass which is very non-intuitive having a ebuild named something very > dissimilar to its common name. > > all was fine untill i went to install ocaml and did emerge -s ocaml only > to find there are TWO packages named ocaml that co-exist seemingly > happily in different categories. this brings back my original question > of if we have a specific naming policy or if some of the dev's are > mistaken about things. > > if we don't have a naming policy yet, should we? it seems as if naming > issues are becoming more significant now that the number of packages in > portage continues to grow. > > any thoughts? > dave
-- Jon Portnoy avenj/ -- gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild naming policy Dave Nellans <dnellans@×××××××.edu>