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

Re: Wham aligner package name - just wham? wham-align?

Hi Afif,

On 30.05.19 17:57, Afif Elghraoui wrote:

On May 30, 2019 5:51:05 AM EDT, Sascha Steinbiss <satta@debian.org> wrote:
Hi Steffen,

I have no exact idea why alignment tools are all given such short
We have http://last.cbrc.jp/ as last-align with is. Should I do the
for wham and name the package wham-align?
That's what I did for lambda [1] and lambda2 [2] as well. Keeps the
namespace clean and users can still search for the name and pick the
correct one.

I think that, especially if the package provides an executable named `wham`, the package should also be called just that. Someone might not bother searching and just directly try `apt install wham`.
Let us hope that there bash-completion or "apt-cache search wham" coming
to a rescue.

I am not aware of any particular naming conflict.
Not yet... ;)

If you're taking /usr/bin/wham already, why leave that package name available?

The next package in need of /usr/bin/wham should not use the wham
package name, either. As we have seen with git, there is no ultimate
guarantee that no other evil package comes up and grabs what I have now
intentionally left unoccupied. But as we have also seen with git, our
distribution is a better place with git being assigned to the git package.

I was undecided, somewhere between your position and Sascha's. Have now
uploaded as wham-align, let's collect some more opinions about it.



Reply to: