Re: what to do with `namespace-pollution'

1998-02-12 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Wed, Feb 11, 1998 at 08:22:08PM +0100, Milan Zamazal wrote: > > "MB" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > MB: There is no need to keep a silly choosen upstream name. We > MB: change a lot of things defined upstream (file location, etc), > MB: and I don't think tha

Re: what to do with `namespace-pollution'

1998-02-11 Thread Milan Zamazal
> "MB" == Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MB: There is no need to keep a silly choosen upstream name. We MB: change a lot of things defined upstream (file location, etc), MB: and I don't think that changing a name from "B" to something MB: more readable is confusin

Re: what to do with `namespace-pollution'

1998-02-10 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Tue, Feb 10, 1998 at 09:26:36PM +0100, Christian Schwarz wrote: > > A few days ago there was a discussion on debian-devel about > `namespace-pollution', i.e., binaries in the PATH which use a very short > name (1 or 2 characters). The problem with such binaries is that users > usually take 1- o

what to do with `namespace-pollution'

1998-02-10 Thread Christian Schwarz
A few days ago there was a discussion on debian-devel about `namespace-pollution', i.e., binaries in the PATH which use a very short name (1 or 2 characters). The problem with such binaries is that users usually take 1- or 2-character names for aliases, short shell scripts, etc. >From the discus