[Pkg-xfce-devel] xfce4-terminal

[Emanuele Rocca]

--BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Simon Huggins <huggie@earth.li>, [2005-05-18 11:21 +0100]:
>  On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 10:11:15AM +0200, Alexander Schmehl wrote:
>  > I for one wouldn't think an xfce4-terminal would be called
>  > /usr/bin/Terminal (because I know, many other programms exist).

>  Right but if you go on IRC then they'll tell you it's called Terminal.
>  I don't really want to get into "It's called Terminal except on Debian
>  because they're odd".

No, we're not odd.=20
It's called xfce4-terminal in Debian because we've got...

$ apt-cache search --names-only terminal | wc -l
32

32 packages with the word 'terminal' in the short description (31 if you
don't consider xfce4-terminal).

>  > But in any case, we are to late, "terminal - a Terminal Emulator for
>  > GNUstep" already has a /usr/bin/Terminal, that would mean, that you
>  > couldn't install both, xfce4-terminal and this GNUstep terminal, which
>  > did the same failure we are going to do.
> =20
>  Well we could always conflict against it.

But it's wrong, considering that it is perfectly reasonable to run both
GNUstep and Xfce on the same machine. Isn't it?=20

>  I think it's a stupid upstream name.  I tried to persuade benny of this
>  before when he was about but he didn't really listen then and to some
>  extent I think you have to respect upstream's wishes.

One could object that they're not very respectful in first instance if=20
they don't care about your suggestions.

ciao,=09
	ema

--BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD4DBQFCizJpC6DuA+rxm2ARAqSCAJjsTvCoQ2YVysuBRuVamPBkRYiNAKCBG53Q
fsT+dy+j3ij9ebjs9+DdbQ==
=uFwf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--BOKacYhQ+x31HxR3--