Naming problem for the "Falcon Programming Language" in Ubuntu.

[Giancarlo Niccolai]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Emmet Hikory wrote:
> On Jan 19, 2008 4:35 AM, Giancarlo Niccolai  wrote:
>> What I am going to do, and for what I ask for confirmation:
>> - ------------------------------------------------------------
>> I am going to repack as "falconpl", set conflict with the "falcon"
>> package and re-upload in REVU. In the meanwhile I have (hopefully)
>> cleaned the stoppers that was listed in the REVU record by persia.
>> - ------------------------------------------------------------
>> Please send to the list or to me an OK or a stopper.
>
>     Please rather:
>
> Repack both source and binary packages as "falconpl" (I believe binary
> is already complete).
Yes, sorry, I meant falconpl for both the source and the binary packages.
The issues from the previous reviews are (hopefully) cleared.
"Hopefully" meaning that I did my best to clear them and I think I
succeed.

> Do not set Conflict: with falcon (this is an incorrect usage of this
header)
> Clean other packaging issues from previous reviews.
Ah, ok, I probably misunderstood the latest intervention.

>> Other than this, I would like MOTUs to consider the binary clash
>> problem. Sooner or later the /usr/bin/falcon name will have to be dealt,
>> and it would be better if we deal about it now.
>
>     I believe that the current proposal under consideration (and not
> yet refuted) is that proposed by Soren Hansen (1).  As such, the
> binary conflict would be considered a bug in the falcon package,
> rather than the falconpl package (unless there is still active
> dispute, in which case someone should correct me).  In any case,
> sometime before the hardy release, one of the usages of
> /usr/bin/falcon will be renamed.  As this conflict has now been raised
> and is under discussion, it should neither block review of other
> aspects of the falconpl package, nor block inclusion if all other
> conditions are met.
I thank you very much for having clarified the point. I will proceed
as you indicate immediately.

In the meanwhile, I post a package with source release 0.8.7 (current
development branch). The current status of source is ready or nearly
ready for a new release, that we (developers at Falcon pl) are issuing
by the end of January. We're just bug-fixing the previous release to
provide the best package we can.


Giancarlo Niccolai.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHkRsL5nwsoBIDC4YRArA0AJ9XKRuOWJ7YPbTQLk41j0vo7XlVjgCcCxFR
ExJWKnMbqo1G0mPocXpb2aE=
=FXFc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----