FWIW I like it the way it is, I'm very used to unix scripts not having a .sh, I'd vote -1 also.
thanks david jencks On Nov 30, 2011, at 7:07 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote: > > I'm more -1 to it. It really is against normal unix conventions to do it. > A user shouldn't need to know if an executable is a shell script, a perl > script, python, executable, etc... That's all that the .sh really does. > > I just checked my /usr/bin directory and 560 of the 2758 "executables" in > there are really shell scripts. Only 16 of them have a .sh extension. > > > Dan > > > On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 8:20:00 AM Guillaume Nodet wrote: >> Originally, the distribution did not contain both unix and windows >> files (there are 2 different distributions in 2.x), but given we now >> have a single distribution containing both files, it seems to me a bit >> more homogeneous to have ".bat" for windows batches and ".sh" for unix >> scripts. >> So I'm *slightly* inclined to rename those, but that's not really a >> big problem to me. If it can help some users, why not .... >> >> Jean-Baptiste, do you see any problem with renaming those files apart >> from the fact that it's not really necessary on unix (so I do agree >> that it's not a requirement). >> >> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 05:25, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Hi Andres, >>> >>> My comments: >>> >>> 1/ the windows script as .bat extension because it's a requirement on >>> Windows >>> 2/ the important thing is the header (#!/bin/sh) in the unix script more >>> than the extension. >>> 3/ it's really important, for portability, to use /bin/sh (which allow >>> us to use with bash, zsh on Linux, csh and ksh on Solaris/AIX) more >>> than /bin/bash >>> >>> I don't see a good reason to rename to karaf.sh, karaf looks very good >>> for me. >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> On 11/30/2011 05:21 AM, Andreas Pieber wrote: >>>> Hey guys, >>>> >>>> I want to start a discussion about this JIRA here on the dev list: TBH >>>> I'm personally quite indifferent but if we want to change this we >>>> should do it now for 3.0 or otherwise it wont happen for quite a long >>>> time (till 4.0). >>>> >>>> So, WDYT? >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Andreas >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> From: Andrei Pozolotin (Created) (JIRA)<[email protected]> >>>> Date: Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 23:45 >>>> Subject: [jira] [Created] (KARAF-1060) use bash file extenstions: >>>> karaf -> karaf.sh >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>>> use bash file extenstions: karaf -> karaf.sh >>>> -------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Key: KARAF-1060 >>>> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1060 >>>> Project: Karaf >>>> Issue Type: Bug >>>> Reporter: Andrei Pozolotin >>>> >>>> >>>> currently, windows /bin files have extensions, such as >>>> karaf.bat >>>> >>>> but unix, do not: >>>> karaf >>>> >>>> I suggest to use, instead: >>>> karaf.sh >>>> >>>> so that I can associate *.sh with bash editors like this >>>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/shelled/ >>>> >>>> :-) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. >>>> If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA >>>> administrators: >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.js >>>> pa >>>> For more information on JIRA, see: >>>> http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira> >>> -- >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> [email protected] >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com > -- > Daniel Kulp > [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
