[crossfire] renaming binaries (was: Moving server towards a modularized system?)

[Mark Wedel]

Brendan Lally wrote:
> On 1/28/06, Brendan Lally <brenlally at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'd be inclined to say that the quickest way to do that would be to
>> have a deliberate compatibility break,
> 
> oh, one other thing which is vaguely related to that, a 2.0 release
> would also seem to be a good time to rename some binaries. Currently
> the server binary is called crossfire, and the gtkclient is gcfclient,
> every few weeks someone appears on either #crossfire or the cfmb who
> can't find the name of the binary to run, the naming system isn't as
> straightforward as it might be
> 
> I would suggest the following mappings (for both binaries and package names)
> crossedit -> crossedit

  Arguably, crossedit should just disappear.  This, however, may become more or 
less an issue depending on other changes (if a code restructuring means 
significant rewrites needed for crossedit, I could see more reason to get rid of 
it.  OTOH, if that major rewrite makes it cleaner, then maybe more compelling 
reason to keep crossedit, or make a gtk replacement).

  Also, if we're going to go with this naming convention, it should probably be 
crossfire-edit(or)

> crossfire -> crossfire-server

  Agree.

> gcfclient -> crossfire-client
> gcfclient2 -> crossfire-client2 (or crossfire-client-gtk2)
> cfclient -> crossfire-client-x

  I don't know if there is any official standard on this, but if anything, it 
would seem the standard is that it be toolkitname-program name.

  Eg, gnome-terminal, xterm, etc.

  It is a little unclear to me where gtk ends and gnome begins - on my system, I 
see a lot of gnome-* programs, but not many gtk-* programs

  But given that, I'd suggest gtk-crossfire-client, gtkv2-..., 
x-crossfire-client, etc to keep that naming convention.

  Perhaps have a generic crossfire-client script that looks for the different 
programs and tries to run the 'best' one available.

> CFJavaEditor -> jcrossedit

  See note above about naming.  That said, I'd be a little less concerned about 
this one, as I doubt there is as much confusion in this (at least on the unix 
side, you don't run it directly anyways - you're going to use ant or have to do 
the java command by hand, so that is sort of hidden).

  I don't in fact know if this can be reasonably assembled into a package or 
installed.  But once again, making a script called jcrossedit that runs the JVM 
with the needed flags (I recall the default memory sizes really aren't big 
enough) may be the way to really go here.