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

[Dirk Eddelbuettel]

On 23 June 2007 at 23:10, Manuel Prinz wrote:
| Am Samstag, den 23.06.2007, 16:50 -0500 schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel:
| > | > 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.

Ah, I see what you meant. I wouldn't -- I generally don;t try to interfere
with how others run their packages.  

We will talk to them about coexisting more peacefully and all that.
Harmonized package names can come after that.

And I noticed that our -doc package really does clash because of the
identically named manual pages.  For as long as the header file can coexist,
that isn;t the biggest worry.

Bye, Dirk

-- 
Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something. 
                                                  -- Thomas A. Edison