On Thu, Aug 22 2019, David Bremner <da...@tethera.net> wrote: > Daniel Kahn Gillmor <d...@fifthhorseman.net> writes: > >> (i also find "notmuch2" rather unsatisfying, but python doesn't have a >> meaningful versioning system for backwards-incompatible API changes for >> its modules, so this kind of name augmentation is the only strategy i'm >> aware of). > > Naming is hard. What about "notmuch3" to hint that it's for python3? A > transition plan could be to have notmuch load the new bindings, after a > deprecation period.
Ug, this naming issue is unfortunate. I don't really like "notmuch3" as a reference to python 3, honestly. What about making these new bindings only for python3, and the old ones relegating to python2, and then just using the same name? Is that too confusing? Do we need to maintain both concurrently? jamie. _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org https://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
