[pacman-dev] libalpm or libpacman?
Hey guys, I'm wondering if "Arch Linux Package Management" is the best name for the new package library. I'm mainly concerned for relatively big utilizers - currently only Frugalware - but also people such as LFS users who seek a nice package management utility. (Of course all of them should be using Arch as we all know it's superior! ;-)) libpacman doesn't sound too good, but any less flavored name should do the trick. I guess it all boils down to whether pacman is "a package manager" or "the Arch Linux package manager" - so, what is it? :-) -- Mark Rosenstand ,;-, ,oOQ Arch Linux /_,K` (§§) Department of Footware ` ` `G
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 09:06:15PM +0100, Mark Rosenstand <mark@archlinux.org> wrote:
libpacman doesn't sound too good, but any less flavored name should do the trick. I guess it all boils down to whether pacman is "a package manager" or "the Arch Linux package manager" - so, what is it? :-)
just look at the code, in pacman, there are pacman_sync, pacman_add, etc. in libalpm, there are alpm_addtarget, alpm_relase, etc. now if libalpm would be renamed to libpacman, then probably we would rename alpm_addtarget to pacman_addtarget, and so, which would mess up the current structure udv / greetings, VMiklos -- Developer of Frugalware Linux, to make things frugal - http://frugalware.org
Mark Rosenstand wrote:
I'm wondering if "Arch Linux Package Management" is the best name for the new package library. I'm mainly concerned for relatively big utilizers - currently only Frugalware - but also people such as LFS users who seek a nice package management utility. (Of course all of them should be using Arch as we all know it's superior! ;-))
libpacman doesn't sound too good, but any less flavored name should do the trick. I guess it all boils down to whether pacman is "a package manager" or "the Arch Linux package manager" - so, what is it? :-)
Well, pacman is a "package manager", based on the "Arch Linux Package Management" library. To say it all, I would prefer to have the library name connected with Arch Linux. Althought it won't promote Arch Linux around the world, it will somehow be more rewarding for the Arch Linux folks. Indeed, even if a package manager linked with this library comes to be used with another distro, people will know where the tool they're using is coming from. Let's consider "rpm". It stands for "RedHat Package Manager", it is used by many distributions, but people haven't forget where it comes from. If it has been named "apm" (A Packager Manager), would there be a soul on earth knowing something about its roots? Just some thoughts, and the reason why I choosed this name in the first place. Nothing definitive, even if, as pointed out by VMiklos, it would turn the CVS repository upside-down :) -- Aurelien
To say it all, I would prefer to have the library name connected with Arch Linux.
That's exactly what I was going to say. If others want to use the Arch package management stuff, why not give credit where credit is due? - phrak
On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 22:22 +0100, Aurelien Foret wrote:
Well, pacman is a "package manager", based on the "Arch Linux Package Management" library.
Sure, it's the name of the library we're discussing. And whether that library is a product of Arch Linux or if Arch Linux is a consumer of that library.
To say it all, I would prefer to have the library name connected with Arch Linux. Althought it won't promote Arch Linux around the world, it will somehow be more rewarding for the Arch Linux folks. Indeed, even if a package manager linked with this library comes to be used with another distro, people will know where the tool they're using is coming from.
I see your point and agree completely. Like OpenSS{H,L} :-)
Let's consider "rpm". It stands for "RedHat Package Manager", it is used by many distributions, but people haven't forget where it comes from. If it has been named "apm" (A Packager Manager), would there be a soul on earth knowing something about its roots?
This actually do kind of sucks with RPM being part of the LSB. It shows a good example of a tool that used to be distro specific, no longer are, but still carry a distro specific name.
Nothing definitive, even if, as pointed out by VMiklos, it would turn the CVS repository upside-down :)
Yeah, you ought to love CVS! The superior VCS (of 1988) ;-) BTW: I started reading the 2.x code and almost wet myself when reading pacman.c, the new code after the library split-up is beautiful. Rock on! -- Mark Rosenstand ,;-, ,oOQ Arch Linux /_,K` (§§) Department of Footware ` ` `G
participants (4)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Aurelien Foret
-
Mark Rosenstand
-
VMiklos