SF.net SVN: gar:[26210] csw/mgar/pkg/gs_ftp/trunk/Makefile

[Riccardo Mottola]

Hi,

let me add to this topic, since I have seen that also "gnome" apps, for 
example, have different prefixes.

One think is of course the original application name, it may already 
contain the library/framework/desktop name.

Riccardo Mottola via devel wrote:
> Dagobert Michelsen via devel wrote:
>> please use CSWgnustep-ftp as „gs“ usually means Ghostscript.
>> Please also add
>>   OBSOLETED_BY_CSWgnustep-ftp += CSWgs-ftp
>
> Do you insist on that? it has been called that way since 2 years.
> Actually the program is just called "FTP" and I deemed the name too
> generic.
>
> I used the gs prefix for other GNUstep applications too: terminal,
> price, & zipper.
>
> What policy shoud we use? Keep the original name and use a prefix only
> when necessary? Always use it?
>
> gs- is much shorter and handier than gnustep- :)
> The "core" gnustep packages have gnustep_ so we could stick to that too.
> In that case it is however directly in the upstream package name,
> gnustep-base/gnustep-gui/gnustep-back

at the moment we do have

Core framework:
CSWgnustep-back
CSWgnustep-base
CSWgnustep-gui
CSWgnustep-make

No prefix at all:
CSWgorm (graphical designer: dev tool)
CSWprojectcenter (IDE: dev tool)
CSWperformance (framework)

Assorted with the "gs" prefix
CSWgs-zipper
CSWgs-terminal
CSWgs-price
CSWgs-ftp


All the issue started because I deemed "ftp" and "terminal" too generic 
as names.

Do we want to rename "everything" to CSWgnustep- ? just the ambiguous 
one? keep CSWgs- instead but apply it to the ones which have no prefix?


Waiting for you,
Riccardo