On Sun, 2018-02-04 at 23:37:39 +0100, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org> writes:
> > Please could you consider using go as new tag name? golang resembles
> > too much to one particular implementation name. For other languages
> > we have python, not cpython, pypy, jython, we have java, not openjdk.
I do care quite a bit about namespaces, and when checking the request
and the bug history, I also considered the possiblity of using go, but
discarded it pretty fast and went with the proposed golang name, because
the former seems like a terrible name to use on a global namespace.
It's at least both a verb, and an ancient game. And golang is definitely
*not* the name of any specific implementation, the reference
implementation tarballs go by just go, and its compiler by gc (which is
also a rather overloaded term). Its wikipedia page even states that it's
commonly referred as golang.
If we had to add a section for a language named k or q or similar I'd
expect it'd be named klang or qlang or something along these lines.
We even have some kind of precedent in the archive, with gnu-r and not
just r as section, which would be also be terrible. :)
> Indeed, the language is called Go, and golang is the web site address:
Sure, it's still not a very good name on its own when taken out of the
programming language context.
I'm also very glad the package namespace for golang packages is
precisely golang- and not go-, which would also be extremely confusing.
> I agree that the new section should ideally be called “Go”.
I think this would be a bad idea for our global section-space.
> Guillem, thanks for sending the patches in the blocker bugs. Could you
> update them to use “Go” instead of “golang” please?
I'd rather not see the name changed, so I guess you'll understand
that even if ftp-masters would unfortunately decide to go for the
change, I won't be very enthused with updating patches. :)