"Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski" <[email protected]> writes: > No dia 28 de Dezembro de 2010 20:53, Dagobert Michelsen > <[email protected]> escreveu: >>> Working yesterday on this kind of stuff I remarked that the majority of >>> our development packages follow this convention and use _devel suffix >>> (116 of 117 explicitly identified as development packages). So it's too >>> late to use the _dev suffix without changing a lot of packages >>> name, even though I would preferred _dev as its shorter, deliver enough >>> information and its homogeneous with other distributions. >> >> Right, I was more focussing on the package name, where the old "standard" >> was sort of CSWfoodevel, but IMHO should be changed to be CSWfoo-devel. >> Nonetheless the shorter and more standard -dev would be even better. >> More opinions? > > I'd vote for the shorter one, -dev. The remaining "el" doesn't convey > any new information, except for being a tiny bit prettier.
Of course the _dev (and not -dev) is the choice but this will provoke some package name changes which is not a great deal in my opinion. What we miss development wise is debugging and source packages but I'll write latter and in another thread about this. Patience... -- Peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
