Hello, I would like to ask whether the silent name change for Thunar was intended or only a mistake. I detected our automated build system failed building Thunar because the filename for the release tar got altered from capital to lowercase letters as well as the folder that it generates also changed capitalization from capital to lowercase leters. I would like to note, that this change may cause automated build envronments for most major distributions to fail building these packages because: a) they can't find the names anymore (capital lowercase changes) = this could be an easy fix in these automated environments b) that all capital references in *.spec files as well as debian automated builds, arch and so on that got named inside these "build" files needs to be altered as well. this leads to 3) There may be a big naming conflict in packages for released packages (rpm or deb) where "Thunar" packages needs to be removed and then replaced by "thunar" packages. Capital vs. lowercase.
Was caused as a side effect by the fix of that bug: Bug #15394 True, would have been better to only push it to master, not into the 4.14 branch, sorry for that ! Since it anyhow is intended to rename "Thunar" to" thunar", does it matter for you if the renaming happens now, or in the future, when master will be released at some point ? Looks like arch already provides a package for 1.8.11: https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/thunar/ For 3), I am not a packager, though I guess it happens from time to time that packages are renamed, so that one package is the successor of some othe package. I would be surprised if there is no standard way to do such a renaming ?
If you think there is a risk for conflict, possibly it would be a option for you to just revert and patch out the questionable commit for your distro ? https://git.xfce.org/xfce/thunar/commit/?h=xfce-4.14&id=d67c06aaddc98cd48aa81fc9029fa682f187ca12
i've just opened a bugreport and RFE for new Thunar to Fedora. I did this because our build system uses Fedora's SPEC files to build and generate newly RPM files. Maybe the original maintainers can help solving the issue. Maybe the issues are not that much of a concern. I put the link below. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1775329
The issue has been taken care of and the involved *.spec files got adjusted to the new requirements.
Glad to hear that it went well. Thanks for taking care !