I just pushed a commit which renames a bunch of stuff like so: dwm-6.1-uselessgap.diff => dwm-uselessgap-6.1.diff dwm-cdec978-alwaysfullscreen.diff => dwm-alwaysfullscreen-git-20130827-cdec978.diff
This was the agreed format but in a way it's a change for the worse. It splits the thing patched against (prog+version) into two parts and puts the patch name in between. To see why this is bad consider http://st.suckless.org/patches/scrollback which stacks some patches on top of each other to get different behaviors. Obviously we want the patches to be mostly flat but that use case is reasonable. It would be better to be consistent st st-scrollback-git-20160620-528241a.diff st-scrollback-mouse-git-20160620-528241a.diff was instead: st-git-20160620-528241a-scrollback.diff st-git-20160620-528241a-scrollback-mouse.diff This way things appended to the base name always represent modifications of what comes before. There are still lots of renames that have to be made by hand, broken patches to contend with, etc. but I thought I'd ask one more time if we're sure we're happy with this naming scheme. Britton
