El jue, 22-05-2025 a las 11:48 +0200, Claudia Pellegrino escribió:
Hi Óscar,
> Am I wrong, should it be called `ms-edit` or `microsoft-edit`? And if > so, is it also logical to rename the executable to `ms-edit` or > `msedit`?
According [..] is a good thing.
With that out of the way, your package is a duplicate of both microsoft-edit [3] and ms-edit [4]. Both were uploaded before yours was. Duplicate packages are not allowed, so I figure that all things considered, the deletion and merge requests are justified.
In this I agree and I recognize that it was 100% my fault. When I searched the AUR for the package I don't know why but I only saw the `- git` version and not the normal one. In this case I am in favor of merging the packages as long as the `edit` name is kept (whether or not I remain as co-maintainer of the package is best decided by the administrators, I volunteer).
Another argument that speaks in favor of the existing packages (and against yours) is that your package causes a clash with `/usr/bin/edit`, a binary that the `vi` package provides. The relative usage of `vi` is ~ 47% [5], which is high enough to be an issue in practice. The two existing packages already took care of renaming their binaries to match the package name.
With this point I do not agree very much, I think it is better to mark that it has conflicts with `vi` (I have put it now, the truth is that I had not realized it) than to put another name to the binary and to the package.
Greetings. -- Óscar García Amor | ogarcia at moire.org | http://ogarcia.me