Re: Tool renames? was Re: First stab at glossary
- From
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
- Date
- Sep 5, 2005, 00:03 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vmzmsbcuc.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <200509042143.j84LhDZo020359@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl>
Horst von Brand <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl> writes:
Show 9 quoted lines
>> 3. Non-binaries are called '*-scripts'. >> >> In earlier discussions some people seem to like the >> distinction between *-script and others; I did not >> particularly like it, but I am throwing this in for >> discussion. > > I for one think this makes the command name dependent on a non-essential > implementation detail, so -script should go.
I had the same opinion. The counter-argument people raised when this topic came up on the list was that it would help grepping in the source tree.
I'm tempted to suggest doing something along these lines:
- Rename things that are implemented in shell from *-script to *.sh, and perl to *.perl in the source tree;
- Install them without .{sh,perl} suffix.Once this is done, the users nor the 'git' wrapper do not have to deal with *-script.
Comments?