On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 06:57:14PM +1000, stomfisite wrote:
> Yes, a couple of good suggestions, although I prefer the minus
> symbol in the file name so as not to confuse with file version and
> type extensions.
>
> i.e. net-stomfi-games.dyne

definitely the minus version is easier to parse because avoids confusion
with the extension.

> The problem with this is you may want to host your dyne module on
> someone else's or several hosts,

i don't see the problem here? can you explain?
true that modules can be mirrored around, for that there will be need
later on also for a gpg signing mechanism.

> so Jaromil's simpler games-stomfi.dyne gets my vote.
>
> This also has the benefit that it can be indexed and sorted on the
> first word.

indeed this makes it easier for people to look thru file lists.

> Incognito will remain as just the single name as I wrote it.
> Obviously this convention should be used for standard individual
> applications like openoffice.dyne.

sure

> We should have the version number for these as in openoffice-2.0.dyne.

i tried this at the beginning but it's not very practical with large
software collection in modules: for instance i update applications
inside the audio.dyne module and then changing the name will force me to
recompile ALL applications, because the prefix changes. i hope i
explained myself on this. so then unless you are doing a one-shot module
like openoffice-2.0 containing just that software, i discourage to
include the version in the name.

> Using this convention my ECA module should become:
>
> ecasound-2.3.3.dyne

well probably in that case yes

> Can we agree on module naming conventions like these?

we should.

> Someone will have to document the naming strategy on the dyne pages.

i will do on dev.dynebolic.org pages, but first wait for more comments
on this in case there are.

ciao

- --
jaromil, dyne.org rasta coder, http://rastasoft.org