Bug#654984: libav: Please use a less confusing package name

[Guillem Jover]

On Sat, 2012-01-07 at 19:03:23 +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Guillem Jover <guillem at debian.org> wrote:
> > Package: libav
> > Version: 4:0.8~beta1-2
> > Severity: wishlist

> > There's now a libav binary package in experimental, which ffmpeg
> > transitions to (due to the upstream change). The thing is that I
> > initially got pretty confused by the name, and on a quick glance
> > thought it was a metapackage for the shared libraries(!).
> >
> > In any case given our current conventions naming a tools/utils package
> > libfoo seems pretty confusing in general, and I'd not expect to find
> > those there. Could you consider renaming the package to something like
> > avtools, avutils, or similar maybe? Although the second might not be a
> > good choice as it could be confused to be related exclusively to
> > libavutil.

> Would 'libav-bin' or maybe 'libav-tools' be better?

Yeah definitely, that also occurred to me just immediately after having
sent the bug report.

> I'm not really convinced by 'avtools' and 'avutils', as both seem
> pretty generic to me.

Right, I even checked for similarly named packages previously on the
archive, but I guess I was misremembering something else, also googled
and there seems to be quite a bit of avtools or avutils.

> 'libav' was chosen to follow the name change of the project
> 'ffmpeg'->'libav'.

Sure, I understood the logic after the first “shock”, but I did not find
it compelling. :)

thanks,
guillem