On Saturday, 7 January 2017 18:53:46 CET Bruno Pagani via aur-general wrote: > > There are 4, almost identical, versions. > > > > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bitcoin-classic/ > > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bitcoin-classic-daemon/ > > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bitcoin-classic-git/ > > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bitcoind-classic-git/ > > > > I inherited some of those, hence the slight difference in naming. Not > > sure if renaming is possible and if the bitcoind- one may be more easy > > to find under a different name. > > I’ll eventually make a review a bit latter (need to fix things following > review of my own packages), but regarding the name, yes it can be changed:
[snip] Thanks, I went through the motions. Looks good. Thanks for the detailed help! > Regarding naming for daemon between `d` suffix or `-daemon`, I have no > opinion and either most people here don’t have one or agree to the only > answer you got before[0], but it should indeed be consistent between VCS > and non-VCS package of the same software. ;) I went for the “foo-daemon-git” solution, makes sense to me. > > Any feedback welcome, and naturally I'd love it if those packages would > > be able to reach the community repo, but maybe they need a little more > > time to mature, I'm not sure. > > > I might come back to you once more when I’ll had the time to review your > packages, but I think some (more experienced) users will provide some > feedback in between and that might not be necessary anymore. ;) Thanks! And good luck with your TU application! :) -- Tom Zander Blog: https://zander.github.io Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel
