From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Subject: Re: 05/15: gnu: wesnoth: Rename package to the-battle-for-wesnoth. Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 19:34:59 +0100 Message-ID: <874l7ojhdk.fsf@nckx> References: <20190326131842.7363.84034@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20190326131844.C73EC209E3@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <87imw4fuee.fsf@gnu.org> <87r2aso7zh.fsf@ambrevar.xyz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48023) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h9CSZ-0004lA-IA for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 13:35:32 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h9CSY-0001Of-EK for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 13:35:31 -0400 In-reply-to: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: swedebugia Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable swedebugia, Guix, TL;DR: we're missing a field like =E2=80=98DISPLAY-NAME=E2=80=99, and all t= his is=20 just hacking around the bush. swedebugia wrote: > Anyone else who have opinions on the matter of acronyms in names=20 > where they can be avoided? I share your aversion to acronyms and senseless abbreviation =E2=80=94 I=20 just had to type =E2=80=98extra-config=E2=80=99 and it made me wince =E2=80= =94 but that's=20 not the point here. > Good useability is important and cryptic acronyms are not=20 > something to expose to the user if possible to avoid IMO. You're equating your preferred naming style to usability (an=20 assertion I reject) and arguing that those sceptical of the former=20 oppose the latter. This is not true. > Maybe this is where we need to discuss what our target audience=20 > is? Nerds only? > Random Joe who is new to GNU systems but dead tired of the=20 > proprietary systems he was taught in school who heard og Guix=20 > through a good friend who helps him getting started? Using this logic, I counter that these very long names unfairly=20 privilege 1337 hackers who can touch-type, and hurt the average=20 Jo' poking at their chiclet keyboard with a chopstick ;-) Both arguments make about as much sense IMO (and caricature=20 users). I think a name like =E2=80=98the-battle-for-wesnoth=E2=80=99 helps= =20 *neither* user. XLong names take longer to type on the command line, and noisy to=20 read in code. Some hinder tab-completion. Any implication above=20 that they are =E2=80=98usable=E2=80=99 at all is doubtful to me. In a GUI, they still look ugly: why no spaces? Why lowercase?=20 Why bother? We don't have to choose between POLA from other=20 command-line package managers and providing pretty metadata for=20 higher-level UIs. We can do both. =E2=80=A6but let's find consensus first ;-) Kind regards, T G-R --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYKAB0WIQT12iAyS4c9C3o4dnINsP+IT1VteQUCXJvCVAAKCRANsP+IT1Vt eTMYAQDRw/Z0y8/8b70L1Ali2g0AIaeARVj1wwo20eHHu33iZQD/SU6eUJuBUjiI uvVU9Ex39VmqAMB9ASGQZXSWMTtMUgI= =tk0b -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--