Re: renamings to remove extensions
On Tue, Sep 29 2009, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 29 septembre 2009 à 11:43 +0200, Mike Hommey a écrit :
>> Improving quality only for the sake of it is not necessarily a good
>> idea. I do agree that if everyone but Debian expects foo to be called
>> as foo.pl, there is a bug in Debian.
>
> Which is why lintian warnings are left at the appreciation of the
> maintainer.
>
> Renaming binaries in a way that breaks interfaces or expectations is not
> desirable, of course. That doesn’t prevent the goal of removing useless
> script extensions from being a worthy one.
Damn. Must be a cold day in hell, since I am on the same page here.
> The idea of putting extensions in scripts is stupid; it denotes a lack
> of understanding of the Unix way, and makes it harder to make them
> evolve in the future. Which is why we should remove these extensions
> when possible, and ask upstream to do so when it is not.
Also, it breaks encapsulation; and makes it unnecessarily hard
to re-implement the functionality in a different language (unless one
thinks it is a good idea to have a python script have the name foo.sh).
manoj
--
This was the most unkindest cut of all. William Shakespeare, "Julius
Caesar"
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: