Avery Payne <[email protected]> writes: >> I think the whole idea of "registered namespaces for software packages" >> is a good idea and should be supported. There are of course different >> ways of implementing it.
> Why not keep slashpackage as an "alternative" installation method? Is > there any reason you can't package both "traditional" and "slashpackage" > methods together? Anything can be achieved by implementing additional levels of indirection. At the moment, I am just interested in whether people (especially people on this list) believe there is something wrong with slashpackage, and if so, what it is in particular.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
