On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:04:31AM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> I would instead propose a rule that says "if the
transliteration to
> ASCII can't be done by the packager, he should contact upstream to
> provide one and use that".
>
If you said that upstream should always be in charge of transliterating I
think this rule would be better.
I just want to cover the case where upstream doesn't care and doesn't
reply to a packager's question on how to name the package. "Always in
charge" would mean that if there is no feedback there is no name.
To use an example that people might know from non-computer life what
if upstream named their package 北京? One distribution might feel
perfectly confident transliterating that as beijing while another
one uses peking. Having upstream manage transliteration pushes the
decision to the correct level to coordinate and avoid confusion.
"Ask upstream and if it doesn't respond take the best guess of the
packager"?
--
Axel.Thimm at
ATrpms.net