File naming conventions [resolved]

johnraff · 2015-03-04 06:03:05

Just bringing this up because of the confusion I get in over xfce packages for example. Names like xfsomething, xfce-something, xfce4-something, then there's xfdesktop4... see what I mean?

So, how does this sound?

Distro/organization:
BunsenLabs or BunsenLabs Linux

Packages:
bunsen-something (like bunsen-logout etc)

Files and commands:
bl-something (by analogy with cb-something)

Directories in /usr/share, usr/lib or ~/.config
bunsen/

Sub-directories named after the package they belong to, eg
/usr/lib/bunsen/bunsen-welcome/

[edit] Tidied up the above to reflect the consensus reached below.

Last edited by johnraff (2015-03-05 07:42:34)

damo · 2015-03-04 06:28:16

johnraff wrote:

...
Distro/organization:
BunsenLabs or BunsenLabs Linux (this is already decided I think)
Packages:
bunsen-something (like bunsen-logout etc)
Files and commands:
bl-something (by analogy with cb-something)
( ...hmmm... I've already put a file bunsen-terminal-emulator.desktop in /usr/share/applications which should be bl-terminal-emulator.desktop by that rule )

Sounds good

Directories in /usr/share, usr/libs or ~/.config
bunsen
or
bunsenlabs
So, still wavering over the last one.
Any opinions on any of this?

"bunsen" would do for the directories I think. Keep BunsenLabs for referring to the distro.

Also by analogy with crunchbang, there are things like /usr/lib/lib-cb-welcome/

smacz · 2015-03-04 06:29:43

If the packages are going to be bunsen-something, shouldn't the /usr/{share,lib} and ~/.config directories omit the 'Labs' portion too? 'Labs' is already reppin' with the 'bl-*' syntax in those directories anyways.

I'm not thinking about any implications involving apt, pipemenus, or anything else where it would be possible (albeit remotely) to create a bug by using the same name. aka:

 bunsen*

This seems like it would be easy to avoid though.

I would have to play around in an install with that setup to see if anything was clashing. If so, then it would be a good idea to differentiate between the two using unique names for each type. Otherwise, I'd be all for uniformity.

P.S. Does debian (or mature derivitives such as mint & ubuntu) have anything to say on this matter?

brontosaurusrex · 2015-03-04 07:29:13

Aren't there missing the codenames for releases? Like BunsenLabs Kowalski or BunsenLabs Private?
(In this case releases in timeline would probably go like Private > Rico > Kowalski > Skipper.)

Last edited by brontosaurusrex (2015-03-04 07:31:16)

pvsage · 2015-03-04 11:15:34

^ We're already got that sorted.
http://crunchbang.org/forums/viewtopic. … 24#p420724
Only thing that's still up in the air is what we'll call anything that tracks testing or unstable.

@John: Looks like you are on a good track with the naming conventions.

Last edited by pvsage (2015-03-04 11:23:14)

brontosaurusrex · 2015-03-04 11:18:22

ok, I guess there is a lot to follow here this days. Hydrogen?

Last edited by brontosaurusrex (2015-03-04 11:22:58)

pvsage · 2015-03-04 11:26:39

^ Yup, I'm well aware of the step sequencer package. Seriously doubt that anyone will mistake BunsenLabs Hydrogen for that though.

damo · 2015-03-04 13:54:23

pvsage wrote:

...
Only thing that's still up in the air is what we'll call anything that tracks testing or unstable.
....

Uranium and Plutonium?

johnraff · 2015-03-04 14:13:58

damo wrote:

"bunsen" would do for the directories I think. Keep BunsenLabs for referring to the distro.

OK

Also by analogy with crunchbang, there are things like /usr/lib/lib-cb-welcome/

For the latter, I'd tend towards /usr/lib/bunsen/bunsen-welcome/
Keep all the bunsen stuff together and name the sub-directory after the package. No?

damo · 2015-03-04 14:33:23

johnraff wrote:

....I'd tend towards /usr/lib/bunsen/bunsen-welcome/
Keep all the bunsen stuff together and name the sub-directory after the package. No?

Makes good sense

pvsage · 2015-03-04 14:51:09

damo wrote:

pvsage wrote:
...
Only thing that's still up in the air is what we'll call anything that tracks testing or unstable.
....
Uranium and Plutonium?

How about fictional elements? Debian unstable has a reputation for being rock-solid reliable...perhaps call our spin on it "Bunsen Adamantium"? (If Stan Lee bitches, we could always shorten that to "Bunsen Adamant".)

Debian Testing tends to take a little longer to fix when it breaks because package maintainers want to test their patches against everything they can think of in the repo to make sure the patch doesn't break something else; basically, the goal of Testing it to achieve perfection by the time it becomes The Next Debian Stable(TM). Since perfection is unattainable, what about "Bunsen Unobtanium"?

damo · 2015-03-04 15:28:38

"BunsenLabs test-tube" and "BunsenLabs beaker"?

pvsage · 2015-03-04 15:42:44

^ I love it!

intoCB · 2015-03-04 16:08:51

Crunchbang testing was the same name as the future stable, like Debian.

So, by the same principle, Hydrogen would be the first and stable release, with Helium as the unstable release, which I think is hilarious in a Dennis Hopper/Blue Velvet way. Later, Helium would become stable (but remain squeaky-voiced). Of course, we don't need to stick to this convention. But that's how things were done back in the Nom'.

Sector11 · 2015-03-04 19:10:19

damo wrote:

"BunsenLabs test-tube" and "BunsenLabs beaker"?

Are your talking:
BunsenLabs test-tube for Debian Testing, and
BunsenLabs beaker for Debian SID

If so: I LIKE it/them/those ...

damo · 2015-03-04 21:04:26

Sector11 wrote:

damo wrote:
"BunsenLabs test-tube" and "BunsenLabs beaker"?
Are your talking:
BunsenLabs test-tube for Debian Testing, and
BunsenLabs beaker for Debian SID
If so: I LIKE it/them/those ...

Yep

pvsage · 2015-03-04 21:11:56

^ Eeyup, that was my thinking. Test tubes break a lot more easily than beakers.

Another idea: BunenLabs crucible. Could be an alternative for testing, or we could use it when Debian testing enters its pre-release freeze.

damo · 2015-03-04 21:52:46

pvsage wrote:

^ Eeyup, that was my thinking. Test tubes break a lot more easily than beakers.
Another idea: BunenLabs crucible. Could be an alternative for testing, or we could use it when Debian testing enters its pre-release freeze.

Clever!

Sector11 · 2015-03-04 22:20:29

This requires a very carefully planned and executed campaign to educate the masses ...

Like:

HEY! YOU! - Yea you! From now on ... ....

in other words +1 to damo's remark! Clever.

johnraff · 2015-03-05 00:40:23

They all fit perfectly.

pvsage · 2015-03-05 07:18:24

We probably should move this sidebar to the Name (query) thread. No need to move these posts, necessarily, just mosey on over there to continue this discussion.

Thanks, I was feeling uncharacteristically clever when I thought of "crucible".

johnraff · 2015-03-05 07:34:47

OK I'll take it the file naming issues have been settled, and edit post 1 accordingly.
This thread has "run its course" I guess, but no need to actually close it of course (shudder).

CrunchBang Linux

SEARCH

#1 2015-03-04 06:03:05

File naming conventions [resolved]

#2 2015-03-04 06:28:16

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#3 2015-03-04 06:29:43

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#4 2015-03-04 07:29:13

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#5 2015-03-04 11:15:34

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#6 2015-03-04 11:18:22

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#7 2015-03-04 11:26:39

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#8 2015-03-04 13:54:23

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#9 2015-03-04 14:13:58

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#10 2015-03-04 14:33:23

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#11 2015-03-04 14:51:09

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#12 2015-03-04 15:28:38

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#13 2015-03-04 15:42:44

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#14 2015-03-04 16:08:51

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#15 2015-03-04 19:10:19

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#16 2015-03-04 21:04:26

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#17 2015-03-04 21:11:56

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#18 2015-03-04 21:52:46

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#19 2015-03-04 22:20:29

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

HEY! YOU! - Yea you! From now on ... ....

#20 2015-03-05 00:40:23

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#21 2015-03-05 07:18:24

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

#22 2015-03-05 07:34:47

Re: File naming conventions [resolved]

Board footer