[Pkg-openmpi-maintainers] [Fwd: Re: Package names]

[Manuel Prinz]

Am Samstag, den 23.06.2007, 16:50 -0500 schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel:
> You mean just like the name libopenmpi1 which I suggested nineteen lines above? ;-)

Exactly. ;)

> | > and openmpi1-dev?
> 
> AFAIK the -dev packages are numbered only if they are tied to an API and/or
> you offer several variants. 
> 
> So openmpi-dev or libopenmpi-dev should do.

You're the DD. ;)

> But openmpi-mpidoc is redundant. Will rename to openmpi-doc which is more standard.

I'm fine with that!
 
> | > The openmpi-mpidoc package contains the documentation of the actual
> | > implementation. The runtime documentation is shipped in openmpi-bin.
> | > openmpi-mpidoc would go along with LAM. I'd like to see a uniform naming
> | > scheme, whether it's *-mpidoc or *-doc. (I personally prefer the later
> | > one.) Should we file wishlist bugs for those?
> 
> Why do we need wishlist bugs?

We don't need them. One could file them against LAM and MPICH, so all
MPI implementation should share a common naming scheme. I think it's
less confusing from an admin's point of view. Maybe I'll do so after my
vacation.

> Enjoy your vacation.

Thanks!

Manuel, breaking his promise to shut up. Again.