[csw-maintainers] Package naming policy

[Peter FELECAN]

"Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski" <maciej at opencsw.org> writes:

> No dia 28 de Dezembro de 2010 20:53, Dagobert Michelsen
> <dam at opencsw.org> escreveu:
>>> Working yesterday on this kind of stuff I remarked that the majority of
>>> our development packages follow this convention and use _devel suffix
>>> (116 of 117 explicitly identified as development packages). So it's too
>>> late to use the _dev suffix without changing a lot of packages
>>> name, even though I would preferred _dev as its shorter, deliver enough
>>> information and its homogeneous with other distributions.
>>
>> Right, I was more focussing on the package name, where the old "standard"
>> was sort of CSWfoodevel, but IMHO should be changed to be CSWfoo-devel.
>> Nonetheless the shorter and more standard -dev would be even better.
>> More opinions?
>
> I'd vote for the shorter one, -dev.  The remaining "el" doesn't convey
> any new information, except for being a tiny bit prettier.

Of course the _dev (and not -dev) is the choice but this will provoke
some package name changes which is not a great deal in my opinion.

What we miss development wise is debugging and source packages but I'll
write latter and in another thread about this. Patience...
-- 
Peter