On 4 January 2011 21:54, Bernardo Barros <bernardobarros2@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all!

I'm packaging some audio plug-ins and I wanted to know if there is any naming convention to this, as with fonts.

Nope.

Since there are different formats (LADSPA, LV2,  DSSI and VST), if we follow the convention used with fonts (like ttf-xxxxx), we will get:

 lv2-xxxxx  dssi-xxxxx  ladspa-xxxxx  vst-xxxxx

It makes sense?

It makes sense, no doubt about that. Remember to also provide the general name of the plugin. An example: 'lv2awesome' is a set of LV2 plug-ins. To fit in with the naming convention, you can name it lv2-awesome, but have: provides=('lv2awesome') If that doesn't conflict with anything. Strip 'plugins' and the type from the name (for the package, not the provision) and try to be as short as possible, but still make sure people know what it is from one glance. A real example: inavada-studio-plugins -> ladspa-invada provides: 'invada-studio-plugins' groups: 'ladspa-plugins' desc: "A set of LADSPA audio effect plug-ins ported from VST by Invada Records" invada-studio-plugins-lv2 -> lv2-invada provides: 'invada-studio-plugins-lv2' groups: 'lv2-plugins' desc: "A set of LV2 audio effect plug-ins ported from VST by Invada Records" For stuff that are apps by their own rights, like calf, skip the convention. Strictly use the (proposed) convention for plugins-only packages. For VST, use the following: linuxvst-* win32vst-* To be honest, conventions only "appear" when in use in the repositories. We don't yet have that many plugins in extra/community to warrant use of a convention.