Re: new cvs committer, some ideas

Alexander Zangerl <[email protected]> wrote on Jun 18, 2008:

>* installation paths
>debian requires more strict adherence to the filesystem hierarchy standard,
>which means for exmh that bitmaps, helper scripts, documentation and
>tcl code should not all end up in /usr/lib/exmh.

>the debian version uses /usr/share/exmh/bitmaps for guess what,
>/usr/share/exmh/ for scripts, 
>/usr/share/doc/exmh for documentation,
>/usr/lib/exmh for tcl code and /usr/bin/exmh for the executable.

The whole world is not debian.

Using subdirectories is not a problem.  Hard wiring those paths
to what debian uses will great problems for other users.

>* explicit paths in #!
>most scripts in the exmh package use unqualified interpreter names
>for wish (but not for /bin/sh, for whatever reason). personally i find that
>a bad idea, and would very much suggest using /usr/bin/wish 
>and /usr/bin/expect explicitely. any comments on that?

No!  Hell no!

That will create headaches for people.

For example, on this system "wish" is installed as "/opt/tcl/bin/wish"
with a symlink "/usr/local/bin/wish" as the standard way of accessing
it.  If there is to be an interpreter name, then it needs to be
either "/usr/local/bin/wish" or "/opt/tcl/bin/wish" on this system.

The last thing I need, is to have to edit every exmh script whenever I
update to a new version.

You are looking at this from a vendor's perspective.  But you need to
also consider the after-market users who need to install exmh in a
place that makes it easily accessible, but which is clearly separated
from the vendor area of the file system.

 -NWR