https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893399
--- Comment #5 from Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmavrogi(a)redhat.com> ---
(In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #3)
> Shouldn't the name of this spec be pcsc-lite-asekey similar
to
> pcsc-lite-ccid? It's a driver of pcsc-lite after all.
Guidelines recommends to stick to upstream name. Also it's driver for any
PCSC service talking IFD interface.
I'm not sure about that. From the spec file this is clearly a pcsc-lite addon
and the guidelines mention:
"If a new package is considered an "addon" package that enhances or adds a
new
functionality to an existing Fedora package without being useful on its own,
its name should reflect this fact."
We do the same with 'pcsc-lite-ccid', even though ccid is the upstream name.
Using pcsc-ifd-asekey would also be acceptable, but I don't believe that
"asekey" for a pcsc driver is right.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component