On Tue, 23 May 2006, Russ Allbery wrote:
I'd really rather stick with the upstream name, particularly since this is
Why not ask upstream WHY they are misnaming the library? libxml-security-c++
is a perfectly ok and valid name...
--
One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 23 May 2006, Russ Allbery wrote:
I'd really rather stick with the upstream name,
Why not ask upstream WHY they are misnaming the library?
libxml-security-c++ is a perfectly ok and valid name...
I'll ask, but again, this is a
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Russ Allbery [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Package name: xml-security-c
Version : 1.2.1
Upstream Author : The Apache Software Foundation
* URL : http://xml.apache.org/security/
* License : Apache 2.0
Programming Lang: C++
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 05:28:07PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
* Package name: xml-security-c
Programming Lang: C++
Description : C++ library for XML Digital Signatures
If it is a C++ library, please name the package xml-security-c++. If
upstream names their tarballs
Guus Sliepen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 05:28:07PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
* Package name: xml-security-c
Programming Lang: C++
Description : C++ library for XML Digital Signatures
If it is a C++ library, please name the package xml-security-c++. If
5 matches
Mail list logo