[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#793192: ITP: suitename -- categorize each suite in an RNA backbone



Perhaps king-suitename and king-probe would be good names for the packages (or suitename-king. and probe-king)   Clearly the probe executable can't be called probe because as Andreas has pointed out this name is already in use.  But I like the admittedly inconsistent idea of retaining the suitename executable name because at least that change won't need to be propagated into the King source.

A possible added advantage of this type of naming would be to differentiate between the program version found on the kinemage site which are suitable as both standalone and king callable and the the latest versions in the rlabduke repo at github which may or may not be king-callable.

I'll try to see if I can get a word regarding strong preference from the authorship group and if successful forward their preference to this list.

Thanks for this discussion and response

Michael

Michael G. Prisant

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:41 AM, Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu> wrote:
Hi Bálint,

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:34:26PM +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> > * Package name    : suitename
> Would not this name be a bit too generic for such special software?
> Maybe rna-geometry-suitename would be a better fit in the archive?

I agree that the name is quite generic and the authors tend to choose
such names in general (I did not yet packaged their software "probe").
However, in this case I think the chances for name space pollution is
not that high and decided to keep the name.

I could be convinced to change the name (of the package - I would like
to keep the name /usr/bin/suitename) if I get more responses like this.

Kind regards

     Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


Reply to: