Hi Thomas, I felt a couple sentences here were reasonable to add (more than “don’t care” from before). I understand your concerns here, and I totally get what you’re driving at, but in the packaging world wouldn’t this make sense to call it "python-bash8"? Now the binary, I can agree (for reasons outlined) should probably not be named ‘bash8’, but the name of the “command” could be separate from the packaging / project name. Beyond a relatively minor change to the resulting “binary” name [sure bash-tidy, or whatever we come up with], is there something more that really is awful (rather than just silly) about the naming? I just don’t see how if we don’t namespace collide on the executable side, how there can be any real confusion (python-bash8, sure pypi is a little different) over what is being installed. Cheers, Morgan — From: Thomas Goirand zigo@debian.org Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date: June 12, 2014 at 15:19:00 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, 748383@bugs.debian.org 748383@bugs.debian.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: Fwd: Debian people don't like bash8 as a project name (Bug#748383: ITP: bash8 -- bash script style guide checker)
|