On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Josef Stribny <jstribny(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 10/30/2013 10:45 AM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
>
> What prevails between the ruby naming guidelines and the "prior art"
> rule (other distros package name) in the general naming guidelines ?
>
>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#General_Naming
>
http://packages.ubuntu.com/raring/vagrant
>
http://packages.debian.org/stable/vagrant
>
>
And how vagrant differs from rhc and other client command line tools that
are distributed as gems and follow this convention?
I am wondering if you are being sarcastic. If not, please do not mind
this answer.
If yes, this was a genuine question. I'm not saying this should be
named vagrant, just that I like the name better. It's just that some
rules conflict on this matter, and I don't know the answer. I might
package ruby stuff in the future though I haven't planned anything so
far. As I said in the next sentence, I'm more concerned about the
double review.
Sincerely,
Dridi