[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       userlinux-discuss
Subject:    Re: [Discuss] Ideas on fixing conflicts so Ubuntu can release
From:       "Benj. Mako Hill" <mako () atdot ! cc>
Date:       2005-04-04 1:15:39
Message-ID: 20050404011539.GD4579 () nozomi
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


<quote who="Brock Frazier" date="2005-03-31 23:58:42 -0800">
> > > If we had a different name than "userlinux-" in the package
> > > names, that would be nice. I don't know what is acceptable as
> > > far as namespace conflicts here, but something like
> > > "enterprise-" or "professional-" or the like.
> > 
> > FWIW, I think that since packages are not pure Debian, having
> > these marked as such in the name is a very good thing.  This is
> > especially useful when we include these in other Debian based
> > distributions. :)
> > 
> > What about munging it and making it 'ul-server' or something?
> 
> Having a lame version of UserLinux in there is kinda lame for a
> package name, especially if the software is being utilized outside
> of UserLinux. If "enterprise-", "professional-", or "business-" are
> reasonable (non-conflicting) name prefixes I recommend going with
> one of them. This makes the software more appealing for use
> elsewhere, better describes the intent of the packages, and further
> distances them from the UserLinux name.

As I said above, I think that having the metapackages refer to the
fact that they are userlinux in some way is a very good thing even if
it doesn't mention the name. You have to remember that will be
installed on system that are otherwise not userlinux. As a result, it
seems extremely possible that someone else might want to create a
metapackage containing their idea of a good collection of packages for
a professional, business, or enterprise use for use with Debian or
Ubuntu systems. Having Userlinux packages designated as belonging to
this project is important IMHO.

FWIW, if you choose to the name packages enterprise-foo, I will rename
them ul-enterprise-foo before uploading them into Ubuntu to
disambiguate things for the reasons I've mentioned above.

> Steve Milner is on top of some of the packaging issues and is worth
> conversing with. I replied back to an earlier post of his that was
> on list but evidently failed to send my response to the list as
> well.

He has mailed me off-list. I've asked him to bring the conversation
back onto the list as other people might have other ideas. In any
case, it appears we will be collaborating.

Regards,
Mako

-- 
Benjamin Mako Hill
mako@atdot.cc
http://mako.yukidoke.org/

Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
far as society is free to use the results. --RMS

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.userlinux.com
http://lists.userlinux.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
List administrator: bruce@perens.com 510-526-1165
Perens LLC / 1563 Solano Ave. / PMB 349 / Berkeley CA 94707 / USA



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]