[Bug 427481] Review Request: documentation-devel - Documentation tool chain

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: documentation-devel - Documentation tool chain


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427481





------- Additional Comments From pertusus at free.fr  2008-01-09 03:26 EST -------
The upstream name is not right to begin with. I don't know about
a precedent, but I myself ask upstream to change their name when it is
to short or too generic (I did that for g2lib, so far they haven't 
acted, but I did what I could). I also made that recommendation for ht.

But here it is easily done since you are also upstream. The name
of the package is part of the 'quality' of the package and having
a name too generic seems to be to me a good enough reason not to
include it in fedora. There are no precise guidelines about what
makes a package unsuitable for inclusion in fedora (except for license
guidelines), but having a package that abuses the shared 
namespaces (package name, library name, binary in /usr/bin name)
is in my opinion a reason sufficient to block a release if upstream is
under the fedora umbrella.

In any case please try to think at your software name from the 
perspective of free software community (other developers and 
users) and ask yourself, is my package rightly named?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.