On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 10:56:13AM -0700, Stephen Hahn wrote: > (I believe that we should have worked harder to make the service names > unique than we did. The service and package populations are quite > different in size, so I think we'll see more collisions.) I guess the > problem here is that, when the Eclipse DTrace plugin comes along, there > will be two "plugin/dtrace" packages (or "dtrace-gui" or whatever).
Well, neither "dtrace-gui-plugin" nor "dtrace-gui" are in any way specific to netbeans, and could be used for eclipse, too. So unless you're going to counter with eclipse-dtrace-gui-plugin and netbeans-dtrace-gui-plugin, I don't think your argument is complete. We're not going to be able to avoid collisions simply by changing slashes to dashes (On Dasher! On Slasher!). If you want to avoid collisions, then we have to specifically avoid consistent naming, which I think is worse. Besides, I don't think we're going to see that many collisions, anyway. In the specific example of a dtrace plugin, we're likely to see one per IDE, which will likely be on the order of half a dozen, which I don't think is unmanageable, particularly if you're able to use globs in the FMRI: eclipse/*/dtrace, which I think is one thing that is not possible on the SMF commandline. > > I'd also like to say that I don't really like "develop" as a component > > here. Let's stick to nouns. I'd be happier with "devel" or "dev", as > > "development" is probably too long. > > I think we chose "develop" over "dev" because of "device". Okay, scratch "dev"; what about "devel"? > > > unbundleds/OpenOffice: > > > > > > 1. Not a system package. Looking at your full fix, I would suggest > > > either command/openoffice or maybe editor/openoffice. > > > > application/openoffice? Or is that too generic? Both command and editor > > feel a bit low-level to me. Commands are things like ls, or even vi. > > Editors are more like vi. If application is too generic, perhaps "office" > > as the class of application? Do we want to stuff that under "application" > > -- application/office/openoffice, where you might also have > > application/crm/siebel, application/graphics/photoshop, etc? > > "office" would be fine with me. There are other "office" instances. But at the top level, rather than stuffing everything under "application" (as part of your "let's rotate differently" spiel)? Danek _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
