On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 1:10 PM, John Layt <johnl...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Monday 13 December 2010 23:56:56 Alex Fiestas wrote: >> On 12/14/2010 12:30 AM, Ian Monroe wrote: >> > Dunno if dropping 'kde' makes sense. Dropping the 'base' makes sense, >> > since its mostly a historical artifact. But workspace is KDE's >> > workspace under past and present marketing schemes, so it makes sense. >> > >> > Plasma-workspace might be ok as well, even with Aaron's point. Just >> > "workspace" seems way too generic. Remember this is the name the >> > tarball would get, probably the name (new) distros would give the >> > package as well... >> >> Well, it is already under the KDE git repository so in theory it is >> already "KDE branded". >> >> For me just "workspace" works.
A repo name of "workspace" lacks context outside of the initial clone from git.kde.org. The "litmus" test so far for repositories I have created is "does the repo name make sense by itself"? In this case I don't think it does. It should be named kde-workspace or sc-workspace from my point of view... > > But if I clone to a random folder or repo somewhere it's a bit too generic. I > think kderuntime and kdeworkspace keeps it consistent with the rest of the kde > repo. > > John. > _______________________________________________ > Plasma-devel mailing list > Plasma-devel@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel > Regards, Ben _______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list Plasma-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
