Re: 06/15: gnu: wesnoth-server: Rename package to the-battle-for-wesnoth-server.

[Pierre Neidhardt <mail@ambrevar.xyz>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1305 bytes --]

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:

> Hello,
>
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 04:32:46PM +0100, Pierre Neidhardt wrote:
>> Sorry, I misunderstood the conclusion of the discussion: I thought that
>> we would simply follow the package naming convention as per the manual.
>
> I am confused about this statement. The naming convention speaks a bit
> vaguely of "project name chosen upstream"; very often, this means the
> tarball name. Now there is www.wesnoth.org, which distributes tarballs and
> executable files called wesnoth.*. So I would argue that the upstream
> name is "wesnoth" and would suggest to revert this change.

I personally don't find the term "project name" vague, I think it refers
to something very specific.  In particular, in my understanding the term
"project name" was chosen to emphasize that it's not the tarball name
(or the domain name).

> This is in a similar spirit to "gcc" for instance; we do not call it
> "gnu-compiler-collection" either, although this is the long name used
> on their project web page.

Well, actually why not? :)  This would be more consistent, make more
sense and be more newbie friendly, something that acronyms never are.
("gcc" could be in the synopsis or the description.)

-- 
Pierre Neidhardt
https://ambrevar.xyz/

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]