On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 00:40 +0200, Ryan Lortie wrote: > hi Dylan, > > Thanks for your remarks. > > On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 07:13 -0700, Dylan McCall wrote: > > We're basing some very important, system-wide (sometimes even global) > > things on simple names that are not being qualified in any way. > > This is a pretty important point and not really a strictly philosophical > debate either. We have some situations like epiphany where multiple > packages have the same name and we need to do some tricks (like renaming > to epiphany-browser) to dodge issues.
I like the idea of all IDs being namespaced. It's cleaner and avoids conflicts (like Epiphany). But right now, we mostly base IDs off of binary names. On Unix-like systems, /usr/bin is already the ultimate naming authority. If you have conflicts there, nothing else really matters. The thought of typing rDNS-style commands in the shell makes me shudder. It would be interesting to look at a list of everything that gives us some sort of names for things, and how well those things line up with each other: distro package names, desktop file names, pkg-config names, D-Bus bus names, settings schema IDs, help URIs, binary names, datadirs, etc. -- Shaun _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
