[Adding some other package maintainers to the thread: As you probably noticed, 'puzzles' and the executables it builds are quite generically named. In various distribution packages, some or all of the commands have been renamed to avoid conflicts, and the package is in some cases named 'sgt-puzzles'.]
On Tue, 2012-08-07 at 17:33 +0100, Simon Tatham wrote: > Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote: > > So, Simon, if these puzzle names should be qualified to make them more > > unique on the PATH, what formulaic change should be made ? My > > recommendation would be "sgt-*" on the grounds that that's unlikely to > > conflict, although it might of course end up with your initials on a > > broken or badly-behaved derivative. > > "sgt-*" is what I'd have suggested too, since it's the most sensible > abbreviation of the title of the whole puzzle collection. > > I hadn't actually considered the risk of crappy derivatives looking > as if I wrote them, but given that they'll probably still be > labelled with my name in places other than their filenames, I don't > think it's something I can get worked up about. Perhaps I shouldn't > have named the whole collection after myself in the first place, but > I couldn't think of a better name at the time and it's too late now. I would be happy to rename the commands like this, but: 1. I would like you to include the command prefix as an option in your own releases, including the documentation change. 2. I would like to get some cross-distribution consensus on this, so that the various packages converge rather than further diverging. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings I say we take off; nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
