Andreas Tille wrote: > On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Daniel Leidert wrote: [..] > > What about using /usr/bin/PLINK? I can't find a requirement in the > > policy to use lowercase characters for a binary/script. Maybe I missed > > it? > > A Plink was discussed and refused [1]
IMO just changing one character is not good. But the renaming it to PLINK - how the whole project is called, seems sufficient to me. Further the article you linked contains just a user opinion and states "no annoying and ugly" - maybe this should have been "not" or "so" - I don't know. But it's just a user opinion, not a TC decision or recommendation. > and finally *any* rename has the > same problem - it breaks existing scripts. That's true. But I could imagine, that a rename from bin/plink to bin/PLINK gets more support from upstream and maybe upstream then is willing to implement this on the upstream side (use PLINK instead of plink and make plink a symbolic link (or a copy at Windows) for backwards compatibility). E.g. the html-xml-utils author also changed *several* binary names because of conflicts with existing tools on request (he simply made a new major release 5 with the new names). PLINKs upstream can't ignore the conflict. putty is not a program you cannot expect in scientific pools. I would say: there is a good chance, that you'll find putty in e.g. university PC pools especially in those, also providing Windows as os. Regards, Daniel -- Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? Der kann`s mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger01 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
