Module names

[Dennis Veatch]

On Friday 08 July 2005 11:47 am, Eric Sandall wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Dennis Veatch wrote:
> > I'm not a lunar dev but have observed the module naming scheme we use
> > reflects (as closely as possible) the naming scheme used by whom ever
> > developed the application as far as the name of the source file goes.
> >
> > For example R. The source file is R-2.1.1.tar.gz and when extracted is
> > R-2.1.1. Putting everything in one case would require some additional
> > manipulation of names that maybe does not need be done with the current
> > method.
>
> Yes, it would require more manipulation in the module (such as
> renaming the SOURCE to use <lower name> instead of $MODULE), but that
> (usually) is a one-time deal for the developer, whereas `lin <name>`
> is done by users/developers all the time, and (IMO) would be more
> convenient if all of the modules used a consistent naming pattern.
>
> Just food for thought,
>
> -sandalle

It may be a one time deal for existing modules however, it would need be done 
for any new module added to moonbase. Frankly I don't really see that much of 
a benefit aside from not needing to know if there were mixed case characters 
in a module name. From my user point of view, I do not find it all that 
burdensome. 

The Lunar developers already have to mind those tarballs that extract into 
some goofy directory instead of what is expected or the comman naming 
conventions.

Personally I have to side with Terry Chan. Your request would be better 
directed at the code authors.