[Dev] [RFC] Voting about package naming for packages modified from Arch

[Nicolás Reynolds]

Luke Shumaker <lukeshu at sbcglobal.net> writes:

> Changing pkgname isn't ideal, but the Arch/Parabola policy is
> generally "ship packages as the original author intended them, not as
> we indent them."  If we are changing the behavior of the software, I
> don't like shipping it with the original name.
>
> That said, this is the point I am most flexible on.

iirc our original intention with renaming freed packages to -libre was
on educating users about the changes made.  we made the exception when
we discovered packages like filesystem would reset systems if .pacsave's
weren't taken care of.

if renaming is cumbersome (after 5 years doing it?) i guess a
post_{install,upgrade} note with the reason would be more helpful.


so my propposal would be:

* always use the upstream name
* (optional) change the pkgrel to parabola
* inform people why this package is different from arch's

the reason to keep people informed is, well, freedom, but also on
changes involving freedom bugs.  keep in mind that our distro is
constantly becoming libre :)


-- 
http://endefensadelsl.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 602 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/attachments/20140830/56770966/attachment.sig>