On So, 2010-08-15 at 11:28 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 09:31:31PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> > Let's keep the APT2 name instead of the UPS name. The UPS name is a good
> > joke, but it's not good for a real program name, because:
>
> > * UPS = Uninterrupti
On 15/08/10 at 11:28 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 09:31:31PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> > Let's keep the APT2 name instead of the UPS name. The UPS name is a good
> > joke, but it's not good for a real program name, because:
>
> > * UPS = Uninterruptible Po
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 09:31:31PM +0200, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> Let's keep the APT2 name instead of the UPS name. The UPS name is a good
> joke, but it's not good for a real program name, because:
> * UPS = Uninterruptible Power Supply
> * UPS = United Parcel Service
> * U
(cross post to merge the two "independent" threads
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2010/08/msg00338.html
http://lists.debian.org/deity/2010/08/msg00097.html
and to ensure everyone has the same information.
In case you want to discuss the topic feel free to do it at deity@)
We started this dis
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 21:31:31 +0200, Julian Andres Klode
wrote:
>I think that all in all, apt2 is a known name already, it can be found
>easily, it can not be confused with other things.
Especially not with apt 2.0 when it's being released. You're doing
Debian a huge disfavor.
Greetings
Marc
--
5 matches
Mail list logo
