Re: Bug#1134655: ITP: forge -- Go library and CLI for working with git forges. Supports GitHub, GitLab, Gitea/Forgejo, and Bitbucket Cloud through a single interface.

Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> Mon, 27 Apr 2026 23:00:09 +0200

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.general
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Sean Whitton <[email protected]> writes:

> Guillem Jover [24/Apr  2:01pm +02] wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Wed, 2026-04-22 at 22:12:55 +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>>> Package: wnpp
>>> Severity: wishlist
>>> Owner: Simon Josefsson <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> * Package name    : forge
>>>   Version         : 0.4.0-1
>>>   Upstream Author : Andrew Nesbitt
>>> * URL             : https://github.com/git-pkgs/forge
>>> * License         : Expat
>>>   Programming Lang: Go
>>>   Description     : Go library and CLI for working with git forges. Supports GitHub, GitLab, Gitea/Forgejo, and Bitbucket Cloud through a single interface.
>>>
>>>  Go library and CLI for working with git forges. Supports GitHub, GitLab,
>>>  Gitea/Forgejo, and Bitbucket Cloud through a single interface.
>>>
>>> https://salsa.debian.org/go-team/packages/forge
>>> https://salsa.debian.org/jas/forge/-/pipelines
>>
>> This uses an extremely generic name for the package and program,
>> please rename this (or ideally ask upstream in the existing ticket
>> you filed) to something more unique.
>
> I agree, 'forge' is extremely generic.

Agreed.  And it is already used in Debian, so impossible to re-use:

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/forge

What do people think would be a better name for the source package?  Any
objections to 'forge-git'?  Sometimes names like 'forge-go' or
'forge-golang' is used, but I've always found them a bit ugly.  I find
'forge-git' a bit more descriptive of what it does.

Upstream replied and will not rename the project.  I think shipping
/usr/bin/forge with a Conflicts:snap (which also provides
/usr/bin/forge) in a binary package 'forge' would be acceptable.  Any
objections?  Renaming the binary names of upstream in Debian will be
quite confusing, unless there is any consensus between
RedHat/ArchLinux/Guix/etc to use the same non-upstream name.  And I
doubt we'll achieve that.  Is there some other reasonable alternative?

/Simon

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 1.2 KB)