-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 08/09/13 15:33, Lunar wrote:
Ximin Luo:
I assume people will be interested in creating Debian packages for these too. I am wondering if we should adopt a naming convention like tor-pt-sshproxy, tor-pt-flashproxy, tor-pt-obfsproxy etc - like how mozilla extensions are all called xul-ext-*. (We could even start a working group too.)
ATM this would involve renaming obfsproxy, but I am about to package flashproxy, and thinking about what to name the package.
I have heard people making the argument that obfsproxy, at least, was not specific to Tor and could perfectly be used with plain SSH. The prefix ?tor-pt-? would not really be appropriate then.
That is an argument that supports keeping the current name, but not directly a counter-argument against changing it.
I'd say that if a package advertises managed mode (using the Tor managed PT envvar/stdio protocol) as its primary usage, then it clearly thinks of itself primarily as a Tor PT, and so it's a good candidate for being named tor-pt-*. (obfsproxy does this.)
- -- GPG: 4096R/1318EFAC5FBBDBCE git://github.com/infinity0/pubkeys.git