[Bug 554101] Review Request: surf - Simple web browser

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554101

--- Comment #18 from Simon Wesp <cassmodiah at fedoraproject.org> 2010-01-25 12:45:04 EST ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> Although Simons comments sound very uncouth to me, 
Sorry, this was not intended. Please don't interpret something in my postings.

> Simon, can you talk to upstream and ask him about renaming his package?
I spoke with upstream (of the browser). He knows there is another software
called 'surf', but he doesn't want to rename his project. It doesn't matter to
me, what's the name of the package is, so I have no problem with a renaming in
Fedora, but I can't see a reason for this.

The current situation is that surf is fedora incompatible. Perhaps it will
never be fedora compatible, but you say I have to rename it to $(whatever),
because a 3rd party repo could package surf. Sorry but this argumentation
doesn't look sane to me and I can't find this kind of argumentation in the
guidelines. IMHO the fact that this isn't compatible licensed for more than 16
years without amendment would disqualify surf (not the browser) for the pkgname
surf in fedora.

surf (the webbrowser) in other OS:
Archlinux: http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=30009 -> surf!
BSD: http://www.freshports.org/www/surf/ -> surf!
Debian: http://suckless.debian-maintainers.org/
http://ftp-master.debian.org/new/surf_0.3-1.html -> surf!

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.