On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 08:17:01AM +0000, ng0 wrote: > Leo Famulari transcribed 2.1K bytes: > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:48:42PM +0000, ng0 wrote: > > > From 23242a1b6b96fed99f2dea3567b95ef35e2ebe5b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > From: ng0 > > > Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 22:42:55 +0000 > > > Subject: [PATCH] gnu: Add github-com-umayr-badass. > > > > > > * gnu/packages/games.scm (github-com-umayr-badass): New variable. > > > > [...] > > > > > +(define-public go-github-com-umayr-badass > > > + (let ((commit "3c3cd669b4fc8f73a102e3702788f7b28dc47dbb") > > > + (revision "0")) > > > + (package > > > + (name "go-github-com-umayr-badass") > > > > The name in the commit message is missing the 'go-' prefix. > > Okay, I will send a correction once you reply to the question > below. > > > > > > + (synopsis "Hacking contribution graphs in git") > > > + (description > > > + "Badass generates false commits for a range of dates, essentially > > > +hacking the gamification of contribution graphs on platforms such as > > > +Github or Gitlab.") > > > > Hahaha, LGTM overall. > > > > Only question is, should we call the package "badass"? I think the > > long Go library names are only necessary for libraries, while we can > > use a shorter name for an executable program like this one. > > Right, I did not consider this. Yes, although badass is quiet generic > and not a very unique namespace? I'm not sure. That's true. Do we want to use the name 'badass' for this package? I didn't find any 'badass' packages in Debian. I think it's okay, unless there is some other 'badass' software that is very prominent and that we might package someday. But I can't think of any.