Hi all, I have reviewed before wmacpi, a small x11 applet that shows the status of the laptop battery. There are several other packages waiting for review in Extras that are also small applications to report other kind of information, disk activity, weather reports,...
A list of possible packages that follow in to this class can be found here: http://dockapps.org/
Since those are small applications I propose to place them under a common prefix, something like any of the following alternatives:
- x11-applets-... - x11-dockapps-... - x11-pluggins-...
My question to the list is if this is appropriate or am I trying to be more papist than the Pope? Probably what I am trying to do unifying the package in a single namespace is better done in metadata...
Is this senseless and we should try to abide to the upstream name?
Best regards,
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 12:41 +0100, Jose' Matos wrote:
My question to the list is if this is appropriate or am I trying to be more papist than the Pope? Probably what I am trying to do unifying the package in a single namespace is better done in metadata...
I really don't think this is common enough to merit its own namespace, however, final naming decisions fall on the maintainer. If you've got 20 of these that you're planning on packaging, then perhaps it makes sense for you to name it "x11-applet-*", but I won't force you down that road.
Is this senseless and we should try to abide to the upstream name?
Probably a good idea. :)
~spot
Am Montag, den 12.09.2005, 09:01 -0500 schrieb Tom 'spot' Callaway:
On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 12:41 +0100, Jose' Matos wrote:
My question to the list is if this is appropriate or am I trying to be more papist than the Pope? Probably what I am trying to do unifying the package in a single namespace is better done in metadata...
I really don't think this is common enough to merit its own namespace, however, final naming decisions fall on the maintainer. If you've got 20 of these that you're planning on packaging, then perhaps it makes sense for you to name it "x11-applet-*", but I won't force you down that road.
Is this senseless and we should try to abide to the upstream name?
Probably a good idea. :)
Is there any _official_ statement on this topic now? I have a similar question about the name of gnome-applets, in my case (#168032) it's gnome-timer-applet vs. gnome-applet timer. The upstream package ist called timer-applet, I think we need at least gnome as prefix. But I'm still unsure, whether to name the package applet-foo or foo-applet :/
On the hand there are: * gnome-applets * gnome-applet-netspeed * gnome-applet-rhythmbox * gnome-applet-sensors
and on the other: * contact-lookup-applet * deskbar-applet * lock-keys-applet * glunarclock (no prefix at all)
Any ideas and comments?
~spot
Christoph
On Fri, 2005-09-16 at 14:24 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Is there any _official_ statement on this topic now? I have a similar question about the name of gnome-applets, in my case (#168032) it's gnome-timer-applet vs. gnome-applet timer. The upstream package ist called timer-applet, I think we need at least gnome as prefix. But I'm still unsure, whether to name the package applet-foo or foo-applet :/
Ultimately, this is your decision. If you're asking for my opinion, I'd say:
gnome-applet-foo
(due to the fact that there are no gnome-foo-applet packages).
~spot
Am Freitag, den 16.09.2005, 09:20 -0500 schrieb Tom 'spot' Callaway:
On Fri, 2005-09-16 at 14:24 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Is there any _official_ statement on this topic now? I have a similar question about the name of gnome-applets, in my case (#168032) it's gnome-timer-applet vs. gnome-applet timer. The upstream package ist called timer-applet, I think we need at least gnome as prefix. But I'm still unsure, whether to name the package applet-foo or foo-applet :/
Ultimately, this is your decision. If you're asking for my opinion, I'd say:
gnome-applet-foo
Thanks, that's my choice, too.
Christoph
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Christoph Wickert -
José Abílio Matos -
Tom Callaway