Proposal: rename sshfs-fuse -> sshfs

Proposal: rename sshfs-fuse -> sshfs

[swedebugia]

Reasons:
* shorter is better.
* the project it self names it sshfs.
* there are no other sshfs implementations to my knowledge

-- 
Cheers Swedebugia

Re: Proposal: rename sshfs-fuse -> sshfs

[Oleg Pykhalov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 851 bytes --]

Hello,

swedebugia <swedebugia@riseup.net> writes:

> Reasons:
> * shorter is better.

Not always, e.g. as you see we have a policy to prefix package names
like font-dejavu and emacs-guix, but I don't see this in ‘fuse’ case:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ guix package -A fuse | awk '{ print $1 }'
enblend-enfuse
fuse
fuse-exfat
libconfuse
python-defusedxml
python-fusepy
python-llfuse
python-llfuse
python2-defusedxml
python2-fusepy
python2-llfuse
sshfs-fuse
unionfs-fuse
unionfs-fuse-static
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

> * the project it self names it sshfs.

It was an “issue” for me to install sshfs by naive typing
‘guix package -i sshfs’ :-)

> * there are no other sshfs implementations to my knowledge

Agree.

Oleg.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]

Re: Proposal: rename sshfs-fuse -> sshfs

[Ricardo Wurmus]

Hi,

I have no objections to renaming the package, though you’ll need to keep
a definition for “sshfs-fuse” to indicate to users that the package has
been renamed.

--
Ricardo

Re: Proposal: rename sshfs-fuse -> sshfs

[Leo Famulari]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 332 bytes --]

On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 12:41:59PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> I have no objections to renaming the package, though you’ll need to keep
> a definition for “sshfs-fuse” to indicate to users that the package has
> been renamed.

Right. See the definition of 'letsencrypt' in (gnu packages tls) for an
example of this.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]