Re: GNOME Games source name

[Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>]

On Wed, 2016-06-01 at 21:56 -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:47 AM, Adrien Plazas <kekun plazas laposte n
> et> wrote:
> > AFAIK the application is already distributed in Arch since 3.18 and
> > as a
> > Flatpak with the gnome-games name.
>
> No, it's not in Arch yet really. [1]
>
> It's funny you bring up Flatpak though, because I think that proves
> you *can* change a project name even after it's been packaged in
> distros.
>
> > This seems like a distribution problem and one which is specific to
> > Debian
> > and its derivatives, so after more reflection changing the
> > project's name is
> > probably not the solution, especially as nothing prevents Debian to
> > use a
> > different package name like the one suggested by Michael.
>
> Of course, Ubuntu and Linux Mint are major Debian derivatives. But
> it's not only Debian derivatives as openSUSE did the same thing! [2]
>
> Not to put words in Michael's mouth, but my reading was that he was
> suggesting a name for your valued project, not for the distro
> metapackage.
>
> Even if Debian and openSUSE changed the name  of the metapackage
> today, that name would not be available for reuse in those projects
> for *years*. In Debian's case, the old name must be kept with a
> temporary dependency on the new name for at least one stable release.
>
> While you mentioned confusion to users as a concern, think about the
> confusion when several distros have to maintain a different source
> package name, meaning the package is named differently in their
> repositories and bug trackers than the primary project. I believe
> it's
> early enough that most of the pain is easily avoidable, even though
> it's less convenient now than it would have been a few months ago.

I don't think it should have to change names. You can name the "new"
gnome-games package in your distribution "gnome-games-app". There's
already prior art in that case with epiphany, the web browser vs. the
game.