Naming Guidelines Clarification for plugins, docklets etc

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sun, 17 Dec 2006 17:15:05 +0100
christoph.wickert at nurfuerspam.de (Christoph Wickert) wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I think we need a clarification of the naming guidelines for plugins
> like panel applets, docklets and so on.

Yeah, part of the problem however is that upstream terminology isn't
very defined either... case in point: 
> Pending packages:
>       * 219932 driconf - A configuration applet for the for the Direct
>         Rendering Infrastructure  

This is a stand alone python/pygtk2 application. It doesn't have a dock
applet or require gnome (or KDE or Xfce for that matter). I think
upstream is calling it an "applet" in the sense of a small
application or utility that performs one specific task.

So I think you are looking at applet in the sense of something tied to
gnome or some other desktop and runs in a small panel area?

> Options:
>      1. Make everything gnome-applet-<foo>, this is used for most
>         packages atm and allows nice sorting
>      2. Make everything gnome-<foo>-applet, just like all the
>         xfce4-panel-plugins: This is closer to the upstream names in
>         most cases and might be better for packages like resapplet,
> wich would simply become gnome-resapplet instead of something stupid
>         like gnome-applet-res or gnome-applet-resapplet
>         (gnome-applet-resolution would be least worse)
>      3. Don't be so pedantic, only rename packages to their parent,
> the rest is maintainer's decision
>      4. Leave everything as it is now and don't make so much noise.

I like option #2. 

> I think we should at least agree on
>      1. a common prefix
>      2. a clarification of the naming/packaging guidelines
>      3. an addition to the guidelines: packages that don't use the
>         upstream name should have a Provides: with the original name
> to allow simple installs
> 
> Ideas?

I think thats good for things that are direct gnome applets, 
how would the existing packages (above)change for that? 

> 
> Christoph
> 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20061217/33a405ff/attachment.sig>