-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hello,
On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:11:04 +0200 Wolfgang Jeltsch <g9ks1...@acme.softbase.org> wrote: > Am Montag, 20. Juli 2009 12:23 schrieb Iain Lane: > > * Package name : agda-executable > > Why agda-exectuable? Wouldn’t it be more common to name this package > agda-cli? On etch, there are five packages with names of the form > *-cli but none with a name of the form *-executable. A GUI interface > would probably also provided by an executable, so “executable” > doesn’t explicitely refer to a command line interface (cli). > > Best wishes, > Wolfgang I don't really mind. I chose -executable as (a) that's the upstream name* and (b) I considered that -cli could be confused with the Common Language Infrastructure. I don't think there's any potential for confusion with regards to the name as this is the canonical `agda' executable. If you feel strongly about it, I don't mind changing though. Regards, Iain * yes, I know there's no problem in going with a different name. This was just the path of least resistance -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkpm4/0ACgkQPy0SnCC/zcfBtwCfSUBEXnXKjhKZ3F84BFd7UwxH 0AkAn12dkrqxXSaql7WGSfFPhDQ7d/fu =1Y/k -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----