Quoting Callum Andrew (2024-07-01 09:06:33) > Hi Jonas, > Thanks for getting Helix into Debian! > I think the package name should be `helix`, but the binary should be kept as > `hx`. > > - This is what all the other distributions use (with a few exceptions- > https://repology.org/project/helix/versions), > making it more consistent across distros. > - It would also make sense as Neovim is packaged in Debian as `neovim`, > but the binary executable is `nvim`.
I am aware of examples in Debian (and outside of Debian, which is less relevant but potentially inspirational) of occupying multiple namespaces, but I don't consider those convincing arguments. Main purpose of a Debian package name is as identifier, and only secondarily serves as a means for discovery. When discovery involves multiple names, it is most sensible to pick only one, and due to shortage of global namespaces then pick the least namespace-invasive name. For extended discovery (e.g. in this case "it's an editor" and "it's also called helix"), short and long description is more suitable than picking a package name that tries to be more descriptive and in the process wastes namespaces. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
