Issue #1312 Update (Comment) "proposal for util renaming"
Status Pending, Zope/feature medium
To followup, visit:
http://zope.org/Collectors/Zope/1312
==============================================================
= Comment - Entry #5 by jbelmonte on May 31, 2004 8:41 am
A clarification: I'm having trouble getting zodb accepted into Debian because of the /usr/bin/ namespace pollution, not the .py extensions. However, such extensions on scripts are discouraged.
Attached is a patch to remove the .py extensions under POSIX. What do you think? [Help: I can't attach a file to this issue!]
Regardless of .py extensions, I'd like to see the commands renamed before 3.3 beta. Shall I work on a patch?
________________________________________
= Comment - Entry #4 by tim_one on May 29, 2004 9:56 pm
zconfig should have a .py extension on Windows -- all Python code should. The reason it doesn't is that Fred (zconfig's author) isn't a Windows programmer, and so is prone to making life needlessly difficult for Windows users. He's not alone in this, of course.
________________________________________
= Comment - Entry #3 by jbelmonte on May 29, 2004 8:02 pm
> The .py isn't an implementation detail on windows.
If that is the case, you must reconcile the "zconfig" tool, which has no such extension.
By the way, my zodb package submission to Debian was rejected due to precisely this generic naming issue. I don't want to make user-visible changes local to the Debian distribution, so I hope this matter will be corrected in the near future.
________________________________________
= Comment - Entry #2 by chrisw on May 5, 2004 9:38 am
The .py isn't an implementation detail on windows.
So, I'm in agreement, except the new files hsould still have .py extensions...
Chris
________________________________________
= Request - Entry #1 by tim_one on May 4, 2004 3:22 pm
>From John Belmonte, on the zodb-dev list:
"""
I'd like to propose a renaming of the utilities currently placed in /usr/bin. Rationale:
* some items are generically named, such
as "fstest". A packager may be forced to
rename these, or put them in a /usr/bin/zope
subdirectory, either of which would break
compatibility with other distributions. This
is the namespace pollution issue again.
* for some items, such as "repozo", the relevant
component cannot be discerned from the name.
This isn't the case for most items, but even
then the naming is ad hoc.
* the .py extension is an implementation detail
and shouldn't be exposed. The zconfig tool
follows this already.
* the proposed names allow discovery through
shell command completion (for example,
"zeo-<tab><tab>")
fsdump.py zodb-fsdump
fsrefs.py zodb-fsrefs
fstail.py zodb-fstail
fstest.py zodb-fstest
repozo.py zodb-fsbackup
zconfig zconfig-check
zeopack.py zeo-pack
runzeo.py zeo-run
zeopasswd.py zeo-passwd
mkzeoinst.py zeo-mkinst
zeoctl.py zeo-ctl
zdrun.py zdaemon-run
zdctl.py zdaemon-ctl
"""
==============================================================