On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 09:19:26AM -0500, Gerald Henriksen wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2017 10:20:13 +0100, you wrote:
>I would like to hear opinion of other packagers about naming. We have
>`parallel` utility implemented in Rust which is drop-in replacement for GNU
>parallel. I was thinking how to name package and how people would expect it to
>be named. So far options are:
>
>* rust-parallel
>* parallel-rust
>* parallel-rs
>
>I dislike first one because it is not ending up in completion while second and
>third are quite good.
To me the second and third make it look like the package is part of
the existing parallel package - perhaps rust bindings to parallel -
and not an entirely different program.
In other words, I could see people install parallel-rust because "it
must be part of the parallel package" based on its naming and not
realize it is an entirely different program doing the same thing.
Yes. In other words, the problem started when somebody decided to
reimplement a well-known existing package in a different language without
changing the name. It seems like the right solution is to ask the
rust-parallel folks to rename their project instead of squatting on an
existing name.
Zbyszek