Summary of the 2008-03-11 Packaging Committee meeting
Ralf Corsepius
rc040203 at freenet.de
Thu Mar 13 06:44:28 UTC 2008
On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 01:25 -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>>> "VS" == Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta at iki.fi> writes:
> >
> > VS> And by the way, in my opinion the discussion should not be only
> > VS> about Unicode, but about restricting package names even to a
> > VS> subset of ASCII (let's say eg. a-z, A-Z, 0-9, -, +, _, .).
> >
> > This is why we need a concrete proposal to vote on. Things would have
> > gone much better if we had one.
> >
> +1
>
> One of the problems I have with "ban packages with unicode names" is
> that it doesn't consider what to do when a package name upstream is
> non-ASCii.
Transliterate/translate them to ASCII.
> My -1 vote is really a vote against having the Fedora
> packager make up a name for an upstream package which I very strongly
> oppose.
Why would this be a problem?
May-be this is a problem with "pictographic" charsets (May-be
traditional Chinese), but I am having difficulties to imagine this to be
a problem elsewhere, because most (all?) languages have an nominal
transliteration/translation to ASCII.
> If a proposal were written that told what the packager needs to
> do to get an acceptable package name I'd likely abstain or (possibly) agree.
I agree that requesting such a name from upstream is advisable, but
making it mandatory to me qualifies as bureaucracy.
Ralf
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list