Re: Renaming svn-bench to svnbench
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 10:38 PM, Ivan Zhakov i...@visualsvn.com wrote: On 11 February 2015 at 00:28, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote: Ivan Zhakov wrote on Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 14:48:04 +0300: On 10 February 2015 at 14:07, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote: Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 18:46:51 +0100: Con: - some people have seen the tool and may have used it with its current name Neutral: * renames have happened in the past (e.g. mucc - svnmucc) For svnmucc, we add a symlink from the old location in Makefile.in: if test $(DESTDIR)$(bindir) != $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir); then \ ln -sf $(bindir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT) $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT); \ fi So you could do something similar for this rename. I think that distro packagers who made unofficially released tool part of they package could do this, but we should not add a symlink in Subversion core. In 1.8, 'make install-tools' installs svn-bench. In 1.9, 'make install' will install svnbench. If 1.9 'make install-tools' doesn't create svn-bench as a symlink to svnbench, then we'll have broken compatibility for users of that makefile target. Therefore 'make install-tools' should create the symlink. The symlink won't be part of the core 'make install'. Makes sense? I don't see problems to have 'make install-tools' to create symlink for svn-bench to maintain compatibility with 1.8. And of course svn-bench should be renamed to svnbench. Looks like we have a consensus. I'll do the changes Thursday morning. Thanks everyone how participated! -- Stefan^2.
Re: Renaming svn-bench to svnbench
Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 18:46:51 +0100: Con: - some people have seen the tool and may have used it with its current name Neutral: * renames have happened in the past (e.g. mucc - svnmucc) For svnmucc, we add a symlink from the old location in Makefile.in: if test $(DESTDIR)$(bindir) != $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir); then \ ln -sf $(bindir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT) $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT); \ fi So you could do something similar for this rename.
Re: Renaming svn-bench to svnbench
On 10 February 2015 at 14:07, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote: Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 18:46:51 +0100: Con: - some people have seen the tool and may have used it with its current name Neutral: * renames have happened in the past (e.g. mucc - svnmucc) For svnmucc, we add a symlink from the old location in Makefile.in: if test $(DESTDIR)$(bindir) != $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir); then \ ln -sf $(bindir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT) $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT); \ fi So you could do something similar for this rename. I think that distro packagers who made unofficially released tool part of they package could do this, but we should not add a symlink in Subversion core. -- Ivan Zhakov
Re: Renaming svn-bench to svnbench
Ivan Zhakov wrote on Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 14:48:04 +0300: On 10 February 2015 at 14:07, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote: Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 18:46:51 +0100: Con: - some people have seen the tool and may have used it with its current name Neutral: * renames have happened in the past (e.g. mucc - svnmucc) For svnmucc, we add a symlink from the old location in Makefile.in: if test $(DESTDIR)$(bindir) != $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir); then \ ln -sf $(bindir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT) $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT); \ fi So you could do something similar for this rename. I think that distro packagers who made unofficially released tool part of they package could do this, but we should not add a symlink in Subversion core. In 1.8, 'make install-tools' installs svn-bench. In 1.9, 'make install' will install svnbench. If 1.9 'make install-tools' doesn't create svn-bench as a symlink to svnbench, then we'll have broken compatibility for users of that makefile target. Therefore 'make install-tools' should create the symlink. The symlink won't be part of the core 'make install'. Makes sense? That's exactly what we do for svnmucc — the Makefile.in code I quoted is run by the 'install-tools' target, which used to install svnmucc into $(toolsdir)/svnmucc. Daniel
Re: Renaming svn-bench to svnbench
On 11 February 2015 at 00:28, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote: Ivan Zhakov wrote on Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 14:48:04 +0300: On 10 February 2015 at 14:07, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote: Stefan Fuhrmann wrote on Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 18:46:51 +0100: Con: - some people have seen the tool and may have used it with its current name Neutral: * renames have happened in the past (e.g. mucc - svnmucc) For svnmucc, we add a symlink from the old location in Makefile.in: if test $(DESTDIR)$(bindir) != $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir); then \ ln -sf $(bindir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT) $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT); \ fi So you could do something similar for this rename. I think that distro packagers who made unofficially released tool part of they package could do this, but we should not add a symlink in Subversion core. In 1.8, 'make install-tools' installs svn-bench. In 1.9, 'make install' will install svnbench. If 1.9 'make install-tools' doesn't create svn-bench as a symlink to svnbench, then we'll have broken compatibility for users of that makefile target. Therefore 'make install-tools' should create the symlink. The symlink won't be part of the core 'make install'. Makes sense? I don't see problems to have 'make install-tools' to create symlink for svn-bench to maintain compatibility with 1.8. And of course svn-bench should be renamed to svnbench. -- Ivan Zhakov
Re: Renaming svn-bench to svnbench
Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: When that tool got promoted to live under ./subversion, we already had a short discussion on whether to keep the hyphen in its name. I've been against the rename only because of it being already released in 1.8 with the - in it. Relevant dev@ thread: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/subversion-dev/201408.mbox/%3c53f34efb.5070...@collab.net%3E I've changed my mind. The name simply looks odd and I feel we should get rid of this idiosyncrasy before it takes too much hold. IMO, sparing future confusion on the user side on how to spell tool names outweighs the inconvenience of teaching a few current users. So, let's rename it in 1.9. Pro: + consistent naming of tools; svn-bench would be the sole exception Con: - some people have seen the tool and may have used it with its current name Neutral: * renames have happened in the past (e.g. mucc - svnmucc) * many distributions didn't even ship a compiled version of svn-bench +1. I agree with your pros and cons and that the pros outweigh the cons. - Julian
