Re: more overly-generic package names from gnustep
On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 03:47:05PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> wrote:
> [...]
> > I don't object to using alternatives, though (which I've just noticed
> > you said you were going to start doing); that makes it reasonable.
> [...]
>
> Depends. alternatives are only sensible if the commandline interface
> is largely compatible between two programs offering the alternative.
> (If the command line interface is basically nonexisting, as for many
> GUI programs this is not an issue.)
My app is a GUI program which accepts a single command line argument --
the name of the schema and thus the task to perform. I name my schemas
with single letters.
Thus:
'pim d' -- edit my todo/list, account list, most stuff
'pim c' -- record a credit card receipt
'pim m' -- search my .flac collection
'pim w' -- record the calories of whatever I just ate
'pim r' -- edit my resume as xml, which I then process into a msword
document.
The reason I wrote the application instead of using one of the 4000
programs in Debian is because it launches quickly and behaves exactly as
I wish. I use fluxbox and 4 gnome terminals: I do use Fluxbox's menu
launcher nor do I use a graphical program launcher. It is much more
convenient for me to launch 'pim c' instead of 'tupim c' -- 2 fewer
keystrokes. I launch the program dozens of times per day.
Thus, an GUI app for which its nice to use a generic name.
What about Imagemagick's "display" ?
Reply to: