All xfce plugins have "xfce4-" prefix, similarly thunar plugins are organized with "thunar-" prefix. It may be good idea to convert xfce-extra/verve into xfce-extra/xfce4-verve
We're following upstream convention. This is how it's named upstream. Also, there really isn't a reason to block unmasking with this.
upstream name is: http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/panel-plugins/verve-plugin if You will look at other panel plugins You will spot that there are little differences, like plugin postfix. Official names are also little different, some of them has this postfix, some not. On the other hand if You will look for other distributions, debian uses xfce4-verve, mandriva xfce-verve as with other xfce plugins. Could we confuse our users a little less?
(In reply to comment #2) > upstream name is: > http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/panel-plugins/verve-plugin Not sure if you noticed, but all the plugin packages drop the plugin suffix. > Could we confuse our users a little less? > I would think that the name of a single plugin is hardly the most pressing issue with regards to confusing our users.
(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > upstream name is: > > http://goodies.xfce.org/projects/panel-plugins/verve-plugin > > Not sure if you noticed, but all the plugin packages drop the plugin suffix. > So do we follow upstream naming or not? Ont the other hand there are also other little changes there. > > Could we confuse our users a little less? > > > I would think that the name of a single plugin is hardly the most pressing > issue with regards to confusing our users. > If You don't change this before unmasking You would never do that. What about naming in other distributions. Any comments? PS. There is no point in more discussion. If You don't want do this, ok, but write it stright, no go upstream. This is Gentoo distribution. You may do whatever You want, follow or not naming of packages, there are many examples in the tree for name changes.
