naming things / Re: Processing of orphan-sysvinit-scripts_0.03_multi.changes

[Joost van Baal-Ilić]

Hi again,

On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 04:18:32PM +0000, Matthew Vernon wrote:
> On 07/01/2021 19:16, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 01:58:46PM +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 09:20:56AM +0000, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
> > > > orphan-sysvinit-scripts_0.03_multi.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
> > > > along with the files:
> > > >    orphan-sysvinit-scripts_0.03.dsc
> > > >    orphan-sysvinit-scripts_0.03.tar.xz
> > > >    orphan-sysvinit-scripts_0.03_all.deb
> > > >    orphan-sysvinit-scripts_0.03_amd64.buildinfo
> > > 
> > > Sorry for that late comment, but I think that package name a bit
> > > misleading. It sounds like a command "Orphan SysVInit Scripts!" —
> > > which is exactly the opposite of what we want.
> > > 
> > > Shouldn't the package be rather named orphaned-sysvinit-scripts?
> > 
> > Or: adopted-sysvinit-scripts
> > 
> > (But I guess it's a bit late indeed for changing names now...)
> 
> Naming things is hard :) My thinking was that this package is a collection
> of orphans. I don't think it's wrong enough that it's worth uploading a
> renamed package (especially this near to the freeze).
> 
> Once it's in testing, maybe some inits might want to Suggest it, which
> probably addresses the discoverability problem...?

Or the binary package could get renamed, without renaming the source package.
That gives less overhead.

Bye,

Joost