[gst-devel] naming stuff

[Thomas Vander Stichele]

Hi gang,

uhm, I know this sounds silly, but I'd like to somehow move along towards
releasing and one of the things that we might have to settle on is naming
issues.

It's a bit messy atm and I for one don't want to set policy by myself on
any of this.  So I'd like some kind of group policy so I can just go ahead
and get it done.

So here's some of the issues we need to tackle and arguments raised :

* end-user-packages (redhat, debian) :
- some people would like to have gstreamer in them, since people will be
looking for packages called gstreamer-* if the thing is called GStreamer
(duh).
- others would like it to be gst-* because it's shorter.
- some people think the core rpm (gst/gstreamer) should be called
  gstreamer.  I personally think the core package should have the same
  name as all of the others.  If we want gst as the base package name,
  then let's please use gst and gst-(plugin) ...
- some people want plugin or plug-in in the package name for plug-ins,
  some don't want that because it is shorter

* tarballs
- my personal opinion is that the canonical name (the thing before the
first -) should be the same as the package's and the same for all of the
tarballs.  Others don't mind having various names

* cvs modules
- some people say that the cvs modules should have the same name as the
tarballs.  Others say that there's no correlation necessary per se.  I
personally don't see where it would be a technical requirement.

As you may have noticed, either way we'll have to clean up some stuff, be
it configure scripts and stuff or moving of cvs repositories and stuff
(which might be hard to get done by sf)

I'll let you all comment a bit and I'll post my view on it tomorrow.  In
no way do I want to impose my view or anything, I'm not pushing for a vote
or something (not ever again btw ;))  I just feel right now that I'm held
back by this issue and that the release is held back - or, if it isn't,
but we release like it is, that we'll regret it in the future.

So, to make my point clear, I would like only one thing : that packages
and tarballs share a common naming structure, preferably with the same
canonical name, whatever it ends up being.

Maybe we should just rename the project (heh) and drop the G or something 
;) .

So, flame on.

Thomas

The Dave/Dina Project : future TV today ! - http://davedina.apestaart.org/
<-*-                      -*->
I can't go away with you on a rock climbing weekend
What if something's on TV and it's never shown again
Just as well I'm not invited I'm afraid of heights
I lied about being the outdoor type
<-*- thomas at apestaart.org -*->
URGent, the best radio on the Internet - 24/7 ! - http://urgent.rug.ac.be/