Hi Charles :)

Message: 6 Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 10:51:15 +0100 From: Charles Bos <charlesbos1@gmail.com> To: "Discussion about the Arch User Repository (AUR)" <aur-general@archlinux.org> Subject: Re: [aur-general] Compiz package naming Message-ID: <CAJr1w13nX3riq=+BoozWuviDA-1gRHcZa-D0RPHvZTdvXg=rsQ@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

This change sounds sensible to me. I would be more than happy to turn compiz-core-bzr back into compiz-bzr.

Regarding compiz.org, that has been dead for a long time and I wouldn't consider it an authority on Compiz information. For instance: on the front page of wiki.compiz.org it states that 0.8.8 is the latest 0.8 release and 0.9.8 is the latest 0.9 release when it is actually 0.8.9 and 0.9.11 respectively.

I wouldn't regard the 0.9.x series is not a fork. It's a development branch which should theoretically be released as Compiz 0.10 or Compiz 1.0 in the same way that GNOME 3.13 is a development branch that will be released as 3.14 in the future.

I think it's a struggle to even refer to it as a development branch these days. It's been used in multiple releases of the (supposedly) enterprise-grade Ubuntu LTS releases. Doesn't sound like the sort of distribution release that "development branch" software would be used in. Personally, I view the 0.9 series as the current release branch.

Regarding the renaming of the 0.8 packages. Perhaps they could be called compiz0.8 instead of compiz-legacy. This sometimes happens in the official repos. For instance: there's wxgtk (which is at version 3) and wxgtk2.8. Just a thought.

Sure, compiz-legacy, compiz0.8, either works. -- Regards, Rob McCathie