svn commit: r502676 - in head/science: . opensph opensph/files

[Alexey Dokuchaev]

On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 11:08:25AM -0700, Yuri wrote:
> On 2019-05-26 01:57, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > As several people, including myself, had repeatedly asked you in the
> > past: please stop doing this.  Most of users expect PORTNAME=opensph
> > and there are no good reasons to confuse them.
> 
> Visual text recognition, ease of read, and users' familiarity with terms
> in specific spellings are the main reasons here.
> 
> This particular project is called "OpenSPH" in the title of its homepage
> (https://gitlab.com/sevecekp/sph) and a few search hits that mention it
> also call it with the same spelling. "SPH" is also an abbreviation in
> this case.

There are plenty of projects named OpenFOO where FOO is an abbreviation
(OpenSSL, OpenSSH, OpenTTD, etc.).  All their package names are lowercase
in most, if not all, distributions and package systems (across *BSD and
GNU).  Abbreviations often make part of the name in software (URL, SQL,
FTP, WWW, ...) but they are typically lowercased in package names (with
an known exception of p5-* and similar groups of ports).

> On the other hand, you site tradition and consensus. But I only saw the
> evidence of consensus for lowercase spelling of directory names. When
> you previously complained about PORTNAMEs, some other people also said
> that it was nothing wrong with these PORTNAME strings.

There is a consensus WRT PORTNAMEs as well, I'm sure you can easily notice
it and obtain numbers with a simple shell script.  That said, please, do
not use mixed cased PORTNAMEs, "distinctive and diverse shape" does not
help it here but only creates needless inconsistency and confusion.

Pretty please.

./danfe