[MDEV-12260] rename README-wsrep to README.wsrep Created: 2017-03-14 Updated: 2018-06-29 Resolved: 2018-06-29 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | MariaDB Server |
| Component/s: | Packaging, Server |
| Fix Version/s: | N/A |
| Type: | Task | Priority: | Minor |
| Reporter: | Michal Schorm | Assignee: | Sergei Golubchik |
| Resolution: | Won't Fix | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Description |
|
rename README-wsrep to README.wsrep to be coherent among all other readmes. file location: |
| Comments |
| Comment by Ian Gilfillan [ 2017-03-16 ] | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In discussion with Monty, he said that renames of this sort have caused unexpected problems before (README.gcov had to be renamed README-gcov), so that README- is preferred to README. Sergei, if you agree, can close as won't fix. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comment by Sergei Golubchik [ 2017-03-16 ] | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There are few scripts to search and/or delete for '*.gcov' files (and such a command is often typed manually too), and it was a nuisance when README.gcov matched the pattern. I don't think it's a particularly strong reason, but still a reason. So, if there is no good reason to use 'README.*' template, I can make sure that all our readmes coherently follow the 'README-*' pattern | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comment by Michal Schorm [ 2017-03-19 ] | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I just wanted some coherent naming, so I checked, if it is typo or if it has a purpose. It looks, most of READMEs use dot: (search in exctracted tarball)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comment by Sergei Golubchik [ 2017-03-20 ] | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sure, I can make it consistent. Keep .md and .txt (where the extension means the file type) and use - where it doesn't. I'll probably leave debian README's as is, debian packaging is too fragile, but you, probably, don't care about those | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comment by Michal Schorm [ 2018-02-18 ] | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can be closed. I really don't care too much. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comment by Otto Kekäläinen [ 2018-06-29 ] | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is no good suggestion on what kind of naming scheme we should standardize on, so we cannot do it a the moment. We will continue with having various naming styles for now.. Also, if we were to standardize on a certain naming scheme, we would need to coordinate with upstreams (e.g. TokuDB, Galera) to check if they are willing to adopt the same style as well. |