Hi, I am working on submitting a new set of exporters I've been working on (https://gitlab.com/zzamboni/ox-leanpub) to MELPA, and I received feedback [1] about the discrepancy between the package names (ox-leanpub-*) and the functions they define (org-leanpub-*). This is also flagged by =package-lint=. [1] https://github.com/melpa/melpa/pull/6942 I based these names on what I've observed in existing exporters - e.g. ox-hugo, ox-latex, ox-reveal and most others define functions named org-hugo-*, org-latex-*, org-reveal-* respectively. I wouldn't mind renaming the package to org-leanpub, but I worry whether this would affect its discoverability, and to diverge from existing convention for exporter packages. I would appreciate any feedback about this - what are strong arguments for or against insisting in this convention vs just adapting to the rules suggested by package-lint? Thanks in advance, --Diego
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 243 bytes --] Hello, This came up when I submitted ox-hugo to Melpa as well[1]. I stayed with the norm.. naming the package ox-hugo, but naming all the functions and variables with org-hugo-* prefix. [1] https://github.com/purcell/package-lint/issues/89 [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 471 bytes --]
On 2020-06-07, Diego Zamboni wrote: > Hi, > > I am working on submitting a new set of exporters I've been working on > (https://gitlab.com/zzamboni/ox-leanpub) to MELPA, and I received > feedback [1] about the discrepancy between the package names > (ox-leanpub-*) and the functions they define (org-leanpub-*). This is > also flagged by =package-lint=. > > [1] https://github.com/melpa/melpa/pull/6942 > > [...] > > I would appreciate any feedback about this - what are strong arguments > for or against insisting in this convention vs just adapting to the > rules suggested by package-lint? Hi there, for org-re-reveal, I use a small wrapper ox-re-reveal.el [2], whose commentary explains this: ;; Org export back-ends have file names starting with "ox-". ;; However, such files typically define variables and functions ;; starting with "org-", which causes errors by package-lint. To ;; define variables and functions with the usual prefix "org-" while ;; avoiding errors by package-lint, code is located in ;; org-re-reveal.el. ;; However, the prefix "ox-" is hard-coded in org.el and used to load ;; back-ends in `org-export-backends'. With this file, you can ;; customize `org-export-backends' and add `re-reveal'. Then, when ;; pressing `C-c C-e', this file will be loaded, which loads ;; org-re-reveal.el. Best wishes Jens [2] https://gitlab.com/oer/org-re-reveal/-/blob/master/ox-re-reveal.el
Hi Kaushal and Jens, Thanks for your feedback, and also for the idea for the workaround used in ox-re-reveal - that's a nice one :) Given the special meanings of both the org- and ox- prefixes, I will insist on keeping the current naming, and maybe take a stab at coming up with a PR for https://github.com/purcell/package-lint/issues/89. Cheers, --Diego On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 7:54 AM Jens Lechtenboerger <lechten@wi.uni-muenster.de> wrote: > > On 2020-06-07, Diego Zamboni wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I am working on submitting a new set of exporters I've been working on > > (https://gitlab.com/zzamboni/ox-leanpub) to MELPA, and I received > > feedback [1] about the discrepancy between the package names > > (ox-leanpub-*) and the functions they define (org-leanpub-*). This is > > also flagged by =package-lint=. > > > > [1] https://github.com/melpa/melpa/pull/6942 > > > > [...] > > > > I would appreciate any feedback about this - what are strong arguments > > for or against insisting in this convention vs just adapting to the > > rules suggested by package-lint? > > Hi there, > > for org-re-reveal, I use a small wrapper ox-re-reveal.el [2], whose > commentary explains this: > > ;; Org export back-ends have file names starting with "ox-". > ;; However, such files typically define variables and functions > ;; starting with "org-", which causes errors by package-lint. To > ;; define variables and functions with the usual prefix "org-" while > ;; avoiding errors by package-lint, code is located in > ;; org-re-reveal.el. > ;; However, the prefix "ox-" is hard-coded in org.el and used to load > ;; back-ends in `org-export-backends'. With this file, you can > ;; customize `org-export-backends' and add `re-reveal'. Then, when > ;; pressing `C-c C-e', this file will be loaded, which loads > ;; org-re-reveal.el. > > Best wishes > Jens > > [2] https://gitlab.com/oer/org-re-reveal/-/blob/master/ox-re-reveal.el
Hi again, > Given the special meanings of both the org- and ox- prefixes, I will > insist on keeping the current naming, and maybe take a stab at coming > up with a PR for https://github.com/purcell/package-lint/issues/89. I submitted a PR to allow certain package-to-symbol prefix mappings in package-lint: https://github.com/purcell/package-lint/pull/177 Feel free to comment! --Diego
Hi everyone, Just a quick update: issue https://github.com/purcell/package-lint/issues/89 submitted by Kaushal has been closed through the PR I submitted, so now package-lint officially accepts "org-" symbols in "ox-" and "ob-" packages :) --Diego On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 9:13 PM Diego Zamboni <diego@zzamboni.org> wrote: > > Hi again, > > > Given the special meanings of both the org- and ox- prefixes, I will > > insist on keeping the current naming, and maybe take a stab at coming > > up with a PR for https://github.com/purcell/package-lint/issues/89. > > I submitted a PR to allow certain package-to-symbol prefix mappings in > package-lint: https://github.com/purcell/package-lint/pull/177 > > Feel free to comment! > > --Diego
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 391 bytes --] Hello Diego, That's great! Thanks for your PR. On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:57 PM Diego Zamboni <diego@zzamboni.org> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Just a quick update: issue > https://github.com/purcell/package-lint/issues/89 submitted by Kaushal > has been closed through the PR I submitted, so now package-lint > officially accepts "org-" symbols in "ox-" and "ob-" packages :) > > --Diego > [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 863 bytes --]
Hi Diego,
Diego Zamboni <diego@zzamboni.org> writes:
> Just a quick update: issue
> https://github.com/purcell/package-lint/issues/89 submitted by Kaushal
> has been closed through the PR I submitted, so now package-lint
> officially accepts "org-" symbols in "ox-" and "ob-" packages :)
Thanks for taking care of this!
--
Bastien