The main reasons being that
a) it is a hidden gem that should not hide in the dark (libs section)
b) it easily gets removed accidently by marking all packages in the libs
section auto-installed, which f.e. can be used to clean up packages on crufty
machines.
Thanks for considering it ;)

The name was decided to follow the libasound2-plugins package naming scheme, so
I think that before renaming alsaequal, this should maybe be discussed with the
ALSA maintainers (I added jordi to CC since he has been doing alsa-plugins
uploads, and since the ALSA Maintainers mailing list seems to be mostly spam).

TBH I'm not really sure if following the alsa-plugins naming scheme actually
makes sense, and personally I would be okay with a rename.

Cheers

Hi,

El dt 18 de 08 de 2015 a les 20:41 +0200, en/na Alessandro Ghedini va
escriure:

I can't even remember why we settled on that name, other than making it
clear it was plugins for libasound2, not alsa-utils, not alsa-tools,
etc.

It could have been alsa-lib-plugins, or whatever.

As for equal, I guess any name would do, but if we wanted to start a
naming scheme, reversing the suggestion of "alsa-equalizer-plugin" to
"alsa-plugin-equal(izer?) sounds sensible to me.

All in all, I guess I don't care at all either way. :)

Jordi

Hi,

El dt 18 de 08 de 2015 a les 20:41 +0200, en/na Alessandro Ghedini va
escriure:

I can't even remember why we settled on that name, other than making it
clear it was plugins for libasound2, not alsa-utils, not alsa-tools,
etc.

It could have been alsa-lib-plugins, or whatever.

As for equal, I guess any name would do, but if we wanted to start a
naming scheme, reversing the suggestion of "alsa-equalizer-plugin" to
"alsa-plugin-equal(izer?) sounds sensible to me.

All in all, I guess I don't care at all either way. :)

Jordi