Re: Rename `eww' to `web'

[Miles Bader]

Nic Ferrier <address@hidden> writes:
> Wait a second.
>
> I already have an HTTP client called web.
>
> So it would be a little unfair to just pinch the name?

It would be perfectly "fair."  If you use a highly generic name for a
package, you shouldn't be surprised when somebody else uses the same
name, and there's little justification for feeling wronged by it.

For that reason, it's obviously a bad idea to choose highly generic
names for packages...

[See the whole stupid mess with "*Step" and their apps called
"Terminal", etc... ><  Sure that made sense in a highly controlled
closed ecosystem; it makes zero sense in a shared open ecosystem.]

*However*, such names are desirable for the user when they want to just
start the app.

So the most practical thing to do seems to be use non-generic names for
packages and specific apps ("eww"), and generic names for shared thin
invocation layers [e.g. the simple (defalias 'web 'eww) dicussed
before].

-miles

-- 
Would you like fries with that?