RFE: Use generic names in packages

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 10:30 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> In the case of README files there is genuine advantages to have generic 
> names.  You have less changes to take care off when you branch off to 
> RHEL, EPEL or OLPC. Maybe other distributions can be encouraged to use 
> README.distribution too.

That would be unfortunate.  README.suse != README.fedora !=
README.ubuntu....

README.distribution is worse for Fedora users than README.Fedora because
it's not telling them that they should read it to understand something
specific to the package as it exists on their system.  It could just as
easily have come from upstream's tarball and be written for upstream's
distro as by the Fedora Maintainer for the Fedora audience.  The whole
point of the file is to tell the user "Hey!  I was written specifically
for this distribution by the package maintainer to tell you anything
special about this software as packaged here."

How much better is README.[generic] for EPEL users and, as Jesse asks,
"Do we really want to disguise the fact that these other distributions
are Fedora derivatives" are the real questions.  I'm leaning towards no
on the latter question.  As Till Maas notes in the thread you cite, we
brand it as Fedora EPEL in bugzilla....

(If I wasn't leaning towards no, I'd probably point out that there are
other names that are less generic than "distribution" but encompass both
Fedora and RHEL.  README.redhat, README.rpm, README.fedoraderivative :-)

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20070628/26d4f6eb/attachment.sig>