Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 11:50:16 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Glen Barber <gjb@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-doc-projects@freebsd.org, doc-committers@freebsd.org, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Subject: Re: svn commit: r40000 - projects/pkgng/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ports Message-ID: <201212141150.17025.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20121212221953.GJ1314@glenbarber.us> References: <201211151440.qAFEeLYN099713@svn.freebsd.org> <201212121124.01664.jhb@freebsd.org> <20121212221953.GJ1314@glenbarber.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, December 12, 2012 5:19:53 pm Glen Barber wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:24:01AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 1:13:49 pm Glen Barber wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 01:05:54PM -0500, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > > > Isn't the actual application just "pkg"? It's unclear to what extent we > > > > really need to be talking about pkgng using the string "pkgng". > > > > > > > > > > The name of the application is pkgng. The name of the command is pkg. > > > > This is not a very future proof name. Do we get pkgngng next, or will it be > > pkgds9? I think pkgng is fine for a WIP name, but once it moves to production > > status it should really just be called 'pkg'. > > > > In my view, the differentation made here can be equated to OpenOffice. > For example, the name of the application (as a whole) is OpenOffice, but > the name of the program for writing a document file is Writer. That's fine, but it's not "New Office" or "New New Office". It's specifically the "ng" part of the name that I think is not suitable for long-term use. > We also have things like "syslogng", that has been around forever. Just because they named their software poorly doesn't mean we have to. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201212141150.17025.jhb>