On 6/5/20 9:04 AM, Filipe Laíns via arch-dev-public wrote:
My main concern here is that it is not as simple as it just being Kyle's decision, it sets a precedent. I believe the naming is incorrect, and as such, should be fixed. I have tried initiating a conversation with the maintainer but with that didn't result in anything.
It did result in something: he said "no".
I really don't want to step in anyone's toes, I have postponed this email as much as I could. Giving the lack of the reply from Kyle, one can only assume he does not care that much about the issue. I am fine with waiting one or two weeks before taking action to make sure he has time to reply, if there are no objections.
"I don't agree with this, it fails to be memorable and using the upstream shortname is confusing and does a disservice to users" sure sounds like he objects to me. -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User