[xml/sgml-pkgs] docbook2x: collision with sgml-common-utils and common program-transform-name

[Daniel Leidert]

Hi, sorry for the delay.

Am Mittwoch, den 21.05.2008, 12:19 +0400 schrieb Peter Volkov:
> Hello, guys. There exists file collision between sgml-common-utils and
> docbook2x packages and that's why most distributions use
> --program-transform-name to make different naming of programs in
> docbook2x. Recently I've received bug report that our naming convention
> does not follow debian one.

I have also an open bug report about the naming conflict:
http://bugs.debian.org/262990

>  I've checked few other distributions and
> found that they use:
> 
> AltLinux: --program-transform-name='s/docbook2/db2x_docbook2/'
> Redhat EL, Fedore: --program-transform-name='s/docbook2/db2x_docbook2/'
> Debian: --program-transform-name="s/^docbook2/docbook2x-/"
> OpenSuse: just moves files to docbook-to-man and docbook-to-texi
> Mandriva: does nothing
> Gentoo: --program-transform-name='s,\(docbook2.*\),\1.pl,'

Thanks for that information. Unfortunately the Gentoo conventions would
conflict with our (Debian) guidelines (no script extensions in /usr/bin
and Co). But see my proposal at the end. Maybe we can handle this
without a script extension.

> So what I'm looking for is some consistent naming that we could agree on
> and ask upstream to add some notes into their package.

I would love to have this issue fixed upstream.

> Personally I like
> names which starts with the same name as original utility to simplify
> search of necessary tool in shell (with tab competition). But what do
> you think about this? What upstream can suggest?

AFAIK, the docbook-utils (guess, that's the same as sgml-common-utils)
forked the docbook2x programs. So normally they should change the name.
But the author is not active anymore. So Steve, are you willing to
change the name? Considering the fact, that docbook2x can and will
handle XML instead of just SGML (docbook-utils), what about simply
changing the name to

docbookx2foo
       ^

On the other side, the suite is called docbook2x, so also

docbook2xfoo
        ^
would fit and not conflict with the docbook-utils.

Opinions?

Regards, Daniel