On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 09:58:25PM +0000, Peter Tribble wrote: > On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Stephen Hahn <[email protected]> wrote: > > To recap these changes at a high level: > > > > - packages intended to be installed by a user should have a unique > > basename, to ease use of the short form, > > Doesn't that, ultimately, cover *all* packages? > > In that case, should all basenames be unique? > > Won't users always want to use the short form? > > In that case, why inflict the hierarchy on the actual package names?
The hierarchy helps with browsing/searching for pkgs, at the very, very least. > Having the category as additional package metadata rather than part > of the name would be a win in several areas: > > - it allows a package to be in multiple categories (essential, I feel) > - it simplifies category localization > -it allows category renames (eg. vendor changes name) without > messing with package names True. I tend to agree. > - it stops all the bikeshedding about whether the category name > is correct for a package There's no end to bikeshedding possibilities, however :/ Nico -- _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
