[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Renaming Ant
- To: ports_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: Re: Renaming Ant
- From: Nikolay Sturm <sturm_(_at_)_sec_(_dot_)_informatik_(_dot_)_tu-darmstadt_(_dot_)_de>
- Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 19:42:07 +0100
- Mail-followup-to: ports_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Organization: Fnord!
* Ian F. Darwin [2004-01-04]:
> Was this name change discussed? If so I'm sorry I missed it. I would
Well, the update was a few weeks old when I took care of it.
> "Jakarta-Ant" or Apache-Ant, there are just books on ANT. The port
> name should be just "ant". We normally name ports by functional
Might very well be. I have no idea what this ant is and please, noone
expect from me to get to know the software I commit ports for.
> category, not by who wrote them. I know there's a p5- prefix for perl
> modules, but not every program needs to have a name prefix as well as a
Your reasoning makes sense to me and if I were to import all these ports
freshly, knowing what they are about, I'd agree. I didn't take the
chance to fix the error that was made by just getting rid of "jakarta-"
but now, I don't think it's worth renaming ant again just to beautify
the tree. Actually I can live with the current naming scheme insofar as
the distfiles are called apache-* or jakarta-*.
We should certainly keep this in mind when it comes to renaming any of
the other jakarta-* ports. For now I will not rename the port.
If anyone of the senior committers has a different opinion on this,
please let me know.
Visit your host, monkey.org