24 Apr
2013
24 Apr
'13
5:09 p.m.
Il giorno Wed, 24 Apr 2013 16:46:01 +0200
Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf(a)alice-dsl.net> ha scritto:
On Thu, 2013-04-25 at 02:33 +1200, Chris Bannister
wrote:
I agree with you and I'm sure no one will never use the name lisp to
package this software, and as a contributor i don't see the problem of
it; let me explain.
The official name is linux-show-player as you can see on google code
homepage, I've just sent a build script to Arch User Repository and it's
called linux-show-player(-svn). If you want to launch the program the
command is, you guess, linux-show-player.
LiSP is an easier to write acronym for documentation, list discussion,
bug reporting...
I hope this dispute on the name won't affect your opinion on
the software itself, and if anyone is willing to propose an alternative
great-sounding name I'm sure the main author would consider it ;)
--
Asa Marco <aesir.ml(a)gmail.com>
I'm thinking purely from the point of view of a distribution
wanting to package this.
There already was a "Japanese code conversion tool" vs "a Convolution
Engine for JACK" for a while ;). However, for Arch there's also no
package named lisp, but a package maintainer for sure won't call a
media player package lisp.