Re: Should the weboob package stay in Debian?
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 04:15:12PM +0100, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
As a pre-amble side-note, some issues of offending users with homophobic
language have been addressed upstream, and I think we should aim to
carry these patches in stable/testing/unstable. (I don't think we have
processes for patching oldstable or o-o-stable, please correct me if I'm
wrong. I also haven't yet verified that these patches are necessary in
all of our suites.)[1]
I think it would be worthwhile to file a BTS bug so it can be easily
tracked which versions of the package we distribute still carry this
bug, so I will do that.
The binary names within are far more problematic. A full enumeration of
the ones that IMHO must change will have to wait for a follow-up email.
But it would certainly include "wetboobs", "boobsize", "boobtracker" and
"flatboob". If the names are to change, I don't think there's any reason
they should not change significantly; merely adding a hyphen would not
be sufficient. I will attempt to suggest some names in a follow-up.
I had a further thought about the names. Asides from the issue at hand,
there is no consistency between the command names. Some are prefixed
"boo", some are suffixed "oob", neither of which is particularly great
at identifying the parent project, and many are neither.
So a completely orthogonal rationale for renaming the tools would be to
unify them under a common, identifying prefix or suffix, or some other
common pattern. This would also permit the future development of a
subcommand pattern like git uses, "woob weather", "woob parcel", etc.,
should that be desireable.
I think the next best step for this particular suggestion would be for
me to take it upstream, and, assuming it meets with some kind of
positive response, I would also be happy to work towards implementing
it. So I will raise this in upstream's Gitlab.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
Reply to: