-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: RIPEMD160
Well and I thought the general naming convention of cpan modules would be to prefix them with perl- anyway; isn't that the case? If that is so, then perl-rename would make more sense to me.
But then again, I'm sorta new around these parts <smile>.
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 04:50:06PM +0100, Sebastian Schwarz wrote:
On 2009-12-13 at 23:43 -0500, Ranguvar wrote:
I'm thinking I should advise the 'perl-rename' maintainer to take over 'prename' with their PKGBUILD, and then delete 'perl-rename', does anyone not agree?
As the maintainer of perl-rename let me defend myself. :)
On 2009-12-15 at 17:11 +0100, Xyne wrote:
Are they really the same?
No, they aren't. They are both based on the same script by Larry Wall and therefore are quite similar. However (perl-)rename on CPAN is more up-to-date and has some additional functionality and command line options. From what I can see prename is only distributed with Debian's Perl package and doesn't have a CPAN/web presence on its own.
The original maintainer of prename probably chose the name "prename" in order to avoid name clashes with /usr/bin/rename from util-linux-ng.
Nevertheless I adopted and updated prename to Debian's newest version. But as perl-rename provides all of prename's functionality and more and is better maintained I suggest deleting prename. I don't care so much about the votes but I for my part prefer the name "perl-rename" as it is more unambiguous than "prename". Unfortunately "rename" was already taken. :)