T-G-R! Thanks for your email. I understand what you mentioned. I came across this link (https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2016/09/21/gnome-3-22-core-apps/), where the dev(s) recommend to use generic names while packaging GNOME Core Apps. :) I think it is better to use generic names for package names and include other aliases/project-names in the package tagline and/or package description. May 6, 2019 7:20 PM, "Tobias Geerinckx-Rice" wrote: > Raghav, > > Thanks for taking a look at this. I'm sure there's plenty to be > improved in how we package a large collection of software like > GNOME in an intuitive way. > > Raghav Gururajan wrote: > >> The following gnome core applications have already been included >> in >> guix's gnome package but requires correct renaming? >> >> epiphany --> gnome-web > > Using ‘correct’ here is a bit strong. > > ~ λ guix install epiphany > ~ λ gnome-web > bash: gnome-web: command not found > ~ λ epiphany > # browsin' time > > While we don't blindly name packages after the binaries they > provide, of course, a look at the project's own publications > doesn't reduce the confusion. Ironic. > > “Web is the web browser for the GNOME desktop and for elementary > OS, > based on the popular WebKit engine. It offers a simple, clean, > beautiful view of the web featuring first-class GNOME and > Pantheon > desktop integration. Its code name is Epiphany. > > You may install Web from the software repositories of most > Linux > operating systems, where it is normally packaged as > "epiphany-browser" or "epiphany". ”[0] > > The README[1] mainly, but not exclusively, talks about ‘Epiphany’. > Even the two URLs balance each other out. I don't think there's > enough here to justify gross renaming, and in the name of all > that's holy let's avoid another mass renaming incident. > > Personally, I think adding ‘GNOME Foo’ to the synopses of all > these packages is sufficient (epiphany does this by coincidence, > calling itself the ‘GNOME web browser’). Eventually, this could > be another use for the separate (G)UI display name field as > suggested in the games thread. :-) > > Package names aren't opaque identifiers, but they can be a little > technical IMO. > > Kind regards, > > T G-R > > [0]: https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Web > [1]: https://github.com/GNOME/epiphany