| 1 |
On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 20:37 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
> >>>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2012, Paweł Hajdan, wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > On 2/11/12 2:00 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: |
| 5 |
> >> Other distros associate a more user-friendly package name |
| 6 |
> >> (application name) to packages. |
| 7 |
> >> Say, they bind libreoffice-writer to "LibreOffice Writer" in |
| 8 |
> >> package metadata. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> [Replying to a random message in this thread.] |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Why do you think that writing the package name in mixed case and with |
| 13 |
> embedded white space would be more "user friendly"? |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
because-removing-all-upper-case-spaces-and-punctuation-from-a-string |
| 16 |
makes it less readable to a non-programmer. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> >> How about expanding metadata.xml (adding to its .dtd) to also |
| 19 |
> >> support this? |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> I still don't see what this would buy us. So far we have a unique |
| 22 |
> identifier (namely ${CATEGORY}/${PN}) for our packages. Introducing |
| 23 |
> another name will water this down and cause confusion for users, in |
| 24 |
> the first place. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> So, can you point out what are the advantages of your proposal? |
| 27 |
> Are they large enough to outweigh the confusion arising? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Users know a package's "natural name", not the occasionally cryptic |
| 30 |
ebuild name, and certainly not the category. If I want to install a game |
| 31 |
called "Neverwinter Nights", it may not be immediately apparent to me |
| 32 |
that I should emerge something called "games-rpg/nwn". |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Adding the natural name to metadata would allow users to more easily |
| 35 |
find the packages they need via packages.gentoo.org and tools like eix. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-Alexandre |
Archives