I made the silly mistake of posting first to [arch-general]. Sorry!
On 2020-02-13 09:24, Morten Linderud wrote:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 12:09:27AM -0800, Brett Cornwall via arch-general wrote:Waybar [1] just had an update where it pulled in a project called "date" [2]. I'm hesitant to package this under the name "date" since GNU coreutils shares a binary with that name. But this isn't a totally obscure library. Should I persuade upstream to change the name? Should I package it under another name? Or should I lay claim to the unused "date" package name and go on with my life?"chrono-date" could maybe work as an alternative name? I'm unsure why this is in [arch-general] and not [arch-dev-public] :)
On 2020-02-13 02:24, David C. Rankin wrote:
And with the note that much of Howard Hinnant's date/time library is being incorporated into the next C++ standard. Quite a feather in anyone's cap.
Does anyone have any strong opinions?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
