Open Stack

Honestly, I kind of don't care. :)

It's more meaningful than most of what's on pypi for naming.

I'd hate to think what these guys think of firefox, grub, thunderbird,
pidgin, zope, git, mercurial, etc, etc.

	-Sean

On 06/11/2014 12:09 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> It's looking like bash8 isn't great. It's too much python-centric. At
> least that's the view of multiple Debian Developers (not really mine, I
> honestly don't care that much...).
> 
> Could we think about a better name?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Bug#748383: ITP: bash8 -- bash script style guide checker
> Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 11:54:01 +0000
> Resent-From: Guillem Jover <guillem at debian.org>
> Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist at lists.debian.org
> Resent-CC: wnpp at debian.org, Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org>
> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 13:49:47 +0200
> From: Guillem Jover <guillem at debian.org>
> Reply-To: Guillem Jover <guillem at debian.org>, 748383 at bugs.debian.org
> To: Thomas Goirand <thomas at goirand.fr>, 748383 at bugs.debian.org
> CC: Ben Finney <ben at benfinney.id.au>, Andreas Metzler <ametzler at bebt.de>
> 
> Hi!
> 
> On Sat, 2014-05-17 at 09:49:04 -0400, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> On Sat May 17 2014 07:46:16 AM EDT, Ben Finney <ben at benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>>> Certainly ‘bash8’ carries no reliable connotation of “style checker for
>>> Bash code”.
>>>
>>>>> This is a reference to "pep8" in the Python.
>>>
>>> In the Python community, “PEP 8” carries strong connotation of “code
>>> style conventions for Python code”. It is *only* because of that
>>> existing connotation that a package named ‘pep8’ implies what the
>>> package installs.
>>>
>>> The same is not true for the name ‘bash8’. It is unreasonable to expect
>>> the average Bash user looking at package names to get a reference to
>>> Python conventions.
>>>
>>> IMO, the package (source and binary) name should more explicitly carry
>>> an implication of what the package installs. Perhaps
>>> ‘bash8-style-checker’ or the like.
>>
>> It's ok, since the resulting binaries will be
>> "python{3,}-bash8". Our users don't get exposed
>> much to source package names, so I think it's ok
>> for me to choose bash8 as name to follow the one
>> upstream, though if you want I can use python-bash8.
> 
> I've to agree with the other people complaining, the name is very
> confusing and as it is, it's a namespace grab. Prefixing it with
> «python-» only clarifies slightly, but at least it stops somewhat
> being a namespace grab, but it is still quite confusing. Please try
> to convince upstream to rename it, and do so in Debian regardless.
> 
> Something like python-bash-pep8-style-checker would seem acceptable
> to me, there's probably better, shorter names that could be used
> though, maybe python-pep8-style-bash, or simply python-pep8-bash.
> With the «python3?-» prefix being a distribution specific thing.
> 
> Also just following upstream when it comes to naming be it for source
> or binary packages is not wise in many cases. Lots of upstreams create
> packages or language modules in language silos, where those names are
> implicitly namespaced by being part of that language community/portal
> for example. Having Http be a perl module is fine, the same for a
> python or ruby module, not so much when it comes to integrating it
> in a general purpose distribution. Why should the http source package
> name be the perl implementation? Even if that source provided modules
> for many languages, why should it take over the canonical protocol
> name for its source package? Also the source package name is really
> pretty visible in many places in the distribution.
> 
> The current practice of many python modules to just use the upstream
> name as the source package name is a namespace grab, wrong and unfair
> to the rest of the distribution, some quick examples to illustrate:
> 
>   appdirs argvalidate audioread distlib
> 
> I wish other language teams in Debian followed the perl lead here.
> 
> Thanks,
> Guillem
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 


-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140611/083b97a3/attachment-0001.pgp>