[redhat-lspp] Re: Updated cups-lspp.patch

[Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu]

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:23:50 BST, Tim Waugh said:

> Small thing: should the daemon be called just 'access', or would
> 'lspp-access' be better?

lspp-access, definitely.  That way, if one of my not-so-LSPP-savvy co-workers
encounters it, they won't mistake it for that other daemon that's running
and providing accessibility functions for the disabled...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/redhat-lspp/attachments/20060721/f43eef6f/attachment.sig>