Package naming dilemma

[Dave Korn]

On 17 August 2006 20:04, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 09:00:22PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote:
>> Christopher Faylor schrieb:
>>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 11:18:28AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>> [snip]
>>> 
>>> I just wanted to say that I really love the idea of something like
>>> remake.  I have spent way too much of my life debugging makefiles and
>>> have wished for something like remake for a long time.
>>> 
>>> So, I am not averse to the idea of getting remake into the distribution,
>>> somehow, if someone can come up with a creative way to do this
>>> (/etc/alternatives maybe?).  I just don't like overloading remake by
>>> adding a "feature" which has nothing to do with its intended purpose.
>> 
>> What for?
> 
> What five?

  I was assuming that the "extra feature" was my proposal to merge in the dos
path-handling patch.

>> I have /usr/bin/makedb.exe and I checked that no files from any other
>> package is overwritten by my makedb package.  I attached the README
>> with the filelist in my first mail.
> 
> remake is more than just a make debugger and I think it deserves to
> be used and advertised in that way.

  It is?

  I mean, I knew it was also a dessert polish, and even a floor topping, but
what *else* is it?

  Certainly the remake homepage doesn't mention anything else that seems
comparable in scale to the debugging features.


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....