Hi all, Steven Robbins, on 2023-07-04: > On Tuesday, July 4, 2023 5:25:34 A.M. CDT Andreas Tille wrote: > > > The thread[2] actually was about the cnvkit example and IMHO we should > > decide now what to do here. I'm persinally in favour of shipping > > upstream names. They moved from setup.py to pyproject.toml so our patch > > does not work any more. I wonder whether we want to fix the patch or > > rather our rules file which does a lot of renaming which we could drop > > and by doing so simplify the packaging. > > > > What do you think? > > I 100% agree with the sentiment of not changing upstream names. Policy is a > guide, and a good one, but in this particular aspect (don't use suffixes) it is > at best a nice-to-have. Seconded, as initially highlighted by Charles, avoiding unnecessary deviations makes heterogeneous setups easier to manage. In one of the packages I prepared, prinseq-lite, I happen to have provided extension-less links to make the command line look nicer, but that was in addition of the upstream commands, not as a replacement. Also in that particular case, this was somewhat easily doable, but there may be situations where getting no extensions will be harder to achieve, in which case leaving the suffix would probably be a better use of everyone's time. Have a nice day, :) -- .''`. Étienne Mollier <emollier@debian.org> : :' : gpg: 8f91 b227 c7d6 f2b1 948c 8236 793c f67e 8f0d 11da `. `' sent from /dev/pts/2, please excuse my verbosity `- on air: Uriah Heep - July Morning
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature