From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29351 invoked by uid 1002); 15 Apr 2003 23:16:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 24269 invoked from network); 15 Apr 2003 23:16:42 -0000 Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 19:16:17 -0400 From: Jon Portnoy To: Dave Nellans Cc: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-ID: <20030415231617.GA27283@cerberus.oppresses.us> References: <1050450162.18807.6.camel@malfus> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1050450162.18807.6.camel@malfus> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ebuild naming policy X-Archives-Salt: 6aceb7f2-283b-4677-b059-a3a8fa8cbb42 X-Archives-Hash: 709d6c0897bdcbc7dee61a1d580f2eff They don't coexist happily. It's impossible to say definitively which one you'll get when you emerge appname if appname exists in two different categories. On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 05:42:43PM -0600, Dave Nellans wrote: > do we have an established naming policy for ebuilds, and where can i > find it? > > my gripe is that when i submitted the ebuild for a program named "balsa" > (under app-sci/tbass) several devs told me i could not name it balsa > because the gnome email client balsa already uses that name. i believed > that is why apps were listed under app-sci, dev-db, etc... which is why > this structure existed in the first place. i was told however this was > not so and that this wasn't allowed. in the end the ebuild was called > tbass which is very non-intuitive having a ebuild named something very > dissimilar to its common name. > > all was fine untill i went to install ocaml and did emerge -s ocaml only > to find there are TWO packages named ocaml that co-exist seemingly > happily in different categories. this brings back my original question > of if we have a specific naming policy or if some of the dev's are > mistaken about things. > > if we don't have a naming policy yet, should we? it seems as if naming > issues are becoming more significant now that the number of packages in > portage continues to grow. > > any thoughts? > dave -- Jon Portnoy avenj/irc.freenode.net -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list