On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Andrei Thorp<[email protected]> wrote: > Excerpts from Laurie Clark-Michalek's message of Tue Jun 23 16:45:04 -0400 > 2009: >> 2009/6/23 Andrei Thorp <[email protected]>: >> > Excerpts from Vitaliy Berdinskikh's message of Tue Jun 23 16:06:28 -0400 >> > 2009: >> >> В Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:39:55 +0200 >> >> Andrea Scarpino <[email protected]> пишет: >> >> >> >> > On 23/06/2009, Vitaliy Berdinskikh <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > The original name is gstreamer-java >> >> > But we have the policies, so if you want to package a project respect >> >> > ours policies. >> >> > please adopt java-gstreamer; after this, someone will delete >> >> > gstreamer-java >> >> > >> >> >> >> " >> >> * If a Java library has a generic name, the package name should be >> >> prepended with the title java- to help distinguish it from other >> >> libraries. This is not necessary with uniquely named packages (like >> >> JUnit), end-user programs (like Eclipse), or libraries that can be >> >> uniquely described with another prefix (like >> >> jakarta-commons-collections or apache-ant). >> > >> > I'd say that gstreamer-java is a generically named library, so it should >> > probably be java-gstreamer. >> > >> > Thanks for clearing it up. >> Why not just rename it java-gstreamer-java? That way we can respect >> the archlinux policies, and also keep the origal name for anyone >> trying to find it on the aur. > > I chuckled. I assume this isn't a serious suggestion. Though it would > solve it, it's not really a "solution". > > I'm think I agree with Andrea still.
Just a note - I feel that it's always preferable to stick with upstream names. If it becomes too generic, then we can tack on some nomenclature. Case in point: feedparser. WTF is that? Oh it's python-feedparser! These bindings are named well enough for my tastes in the original upstream project.
