-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 07:45 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 07:53:32PM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
>> On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 00:10 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Could it be possible for the packaging commitee to decide on that issue,
>>> please? The proposals are:
>>>
>>> * prefix with tex-
>>> * no specific naming. Prefix with tex- when another package has the same
>>> name
>>>
>>> Could it be possible to have a vote/decision on that issue?
>> Please pick one and propose it to us. (Or both, as they seem to work
>> well together).
> I can't propose one, since there are people that want one and other
> that want the other. I am asking for a ruling by the packaging
> commitee.
Fair enough. I propose that we change the prefix from tetex- to tex-,
since these packages were prefixed before.
If email voting is sufficient for this,
+1 to making the prefix tex-
- -Toshio
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFG9FVhX6yAic2E7kgRApByAKCf3aAqqqEk1aMqmuXlRFe1xLCplgCfa1MP
YHzK0+IvO6coB8JpJRTde9Y=
=c13X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----