[gst-devel] naming stuff

Erik Walthinsen omega at temple-baptist.com
Thu Jan 3 22:42:08 CET 2002

On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:

> * 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).
There's a point to that, especially since that's what we have currently,
though I don't think it's big deal IMO.

> - 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
I personally prefer to use gst-plugin-<name> for plugins, because it
differentiates them from the rest of the tools and apps, unlike:


Plugins all come from the gst-plugins module/tarball, so IMO they should
have a prefix over and above just whatever primary prefix we choose.

> * 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.
The technical reason for this is that the directories will match.  An
autoconf'd package is always called by the package name in the
configure.ac, and from this both the name of the tarball and the name of
the directory in the tarball come.  If this directory is different from
the cvs module, it will be annoying, confusing, and likely cause trouble
with gst-all.

> 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've found that simple stuff seems to get done reasonably quickly.  It's
complex stuff like letting the project admins themselves fix CVS repo
issues that they seem to totally ignore.

> Maybe we should just rename the project (heh) and drop the G or something
> ;) .
If someone were to come up with a really good name all of the sudden, now
would be the time to change it.  After all, I never was really all that
happy with the name, as I've always been bad at naming things...  There
are some basic constraints though: I'd prefer if it didn't lean towards
GNOME as much as GStreamer does, and it should have a 2-4 letter short
name, as 'gst'.

I think my perferred scheme is something like:

module/tarball		rpm/deb
--------------		-------
gstreamer		gstreamer
gst-editor		gst-editor
gst-player		gst-player

      Erik Walthinsen <omega at temple-baptist.com> - System Administrator
       /  \                GStreamer - The only way to stream!
      |    | M E G A        ***** http://gstreamer.net/ *****
      _\  /_

More information about the gstreamer-devel mailing list