26 May
2011
26 May
'11
3:58 a.m.
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 05:33:42PM +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote:
This is a non-issue. The package name was wrong all along, so why not let it remain wrong?
Why was the package named as it was? What were the reasons given when it was created? I've wondered this in the past, especially since other distros don't follow the same convention as Arch.