Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (127 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-packaging] Re: Poll about Url vs URL in RPM preamble
On 08/12/2017 04:19 AM, Jan Ritzerfeld wrote:
Am Freitag, 11. August 2017, 15:31:29 CEST schrieb Jason Craig:
I see that the linked style guide (this is a question of style as tag
names are case insensitive) is from Google for Java.

Or Microsoft:
Or Rust:

So MS, who brought us XMLHttpRequest? Whose genesis was an interface named IXMLHTTPRequest? To many people, including me, Microsoft is not an authority to follow when it comes to software development.

Since SUSE is not
Google and RPM spec files are not Java, I don't see any reason why this
style guide is applicable.

So, where is the style guide that says otherwise and justifies this change
request? I agree with Marcus and do not see a point in changing one specific
name without having a general naming convention!

This is precisely what I'm advocating, perhaps I'm being too implicit?

Even if the linked guide is used just to say
"what camel case is", there are other people who think acronyms and/or
initialisms can/should be all caps in camel case. In fact this Fedora
ew has the URL tag name as all uppercase.

I don't think that using all upper acronyms and initialisms is a good idea
since it generates unreadable names like XMLHTTPOSIDRequest.

And we can find ways in which lower-casing the letters makes acronyms or initialisms unreadable. In fact, you could argue any initialism becomes unreadable because you say each letter and lower-casing tends to make one read it as a word. I would rather a guide suggest not to create indentifiers with multiple adjacent acronyms or initialisms regardless of capitalization than use such examples to argue why you should capitalize one way or another.

Is there an OpenSUSE document (a style guide) that says spec file tag
names should be in upper camel case, and further clarifies that upper
camel case means that initialisms and acronyms should be rendered like
"Url"? If so, then so be it, otherwise I think the discussion here is
what should such a document say.

A naming convention should be applied as broadly as possible and not only to
RPM tag names. Using different definitions just because it's another
"language" doesn't make life easier. How many naming conventions should I read
when I create or maintain a package?

All well and good, but in that case aren't RPM tags most like parameters or variables? I believe all the linked examples have had these types of identifiers in lower camel case.


Jason Craig
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups