On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 07:45:53PM +0200, Stephan Beal wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 7:43 PM, Mark Janssen <mpc.jans...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > +1 for libfossil. I hate it when libraries have smart names requiring me > > to google for the package name to install. > > BTW (should have noted this earlier): there is a filesystem called > "fossil", and while i have not found a libfossil naming conflict (==cursor > googling), there might potentially be one, which is why i eventually tagged > -scm to the name. But, again, i'm not emotionally attached to that. In > fact, the name doesn't have to contain "fossil", but i assume that'd be > easier for everyone.
I definitely vote for the name libfossil. In fact, if you don't use it, I might have to encourage another Fossil library effort just so there's a libfossil that everyone will be able to find and remember. -- Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
