[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Our package names should not include "github-com"
From: |
ng0 |
Subject: |
Re: Our package names should not include "github-com" |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Oct 2017 17:44:40 +0000 |
ng0 transcribed 2.5K bytes:
> Mark H Weaver transcribed 0.9K bytes:
> > Hi Leo,
> >
> > address@hidden (Leo Famulari) writes:
> >
> > > lfam pushed a commit to branch master
> > > in repository guix.
> > >
> > > commit 478ebb31a96955fc03fcea55a4432976ddb49319
> > > Author: Leo Famulari <address@hidden>
> > > Date: Wed Oct 11 20:22:32 2017 -0400
> > >
> > > gnu: Add go-github-com-templexxx-reedsolomon.
> >
> > On this, and a great many other packages, you've included "github-com-"
> > in the package names. I think this is a very bad idea. For one thing,
> > we should not advertise, promote, or enhance the lock-in of GitHub, and
> > this policy does all three. Sometimes a maintainer decides to change
> > their hosting arrangements. When they do so, we should simply be able
> > to update some URLs in one package definition. We should not have to do
> > a global find/replace on the package name and alert our users to update
> > their profiles and OS definitions. That contributes to lock-in.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Mark
>
> I think Leo just followed the upstream conventions here, where it is
> named after the path the go module ends in.
> If we decide not to name the package like this, we might break expectations.
> So when we break expectations, what are the alternative naming schemes
> we could pick for go packages that'll still make sense to people
> using Go?
One idea could be:
go-templexxx-reedsolomon
so just remove the hoster from the package name.
I'm not using Go, so I don't know if this will make any sense
or cause potential namespace issues.
--
ng0
GnuPG: A88C8ADD129828D7EAC02E52E22F9BBFEE348588
GnuPG: https://dist.ng0.infotropique.org/dist/keys/
https://www.infotropique.org https://ng0.infotropique.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature