pgsphere or pg_sphere?
Opened this issue · 4 comments
The repository name is pgsphere. The extension name is pg_sphere. The document uses pgSphere. The names are not consistent. I propose to think about this problem.
Not the same question, but there's also a giant dichotomy between the naming of SQL functions and C functions, e.g. scircle_* vs spherecircle_*. And half of the C/SQL files are named pgs_* while the rest doesn't have a prefix. It's very confusing.
The repository name is pgsphere. The extension name is pg_sphere. The document uses pgSphere. The names are not consistent. I propose to think about this problem.
I much prefer pgsphere, and I think it's acceptable to use pgSphere in the documentation.
I really don't like pg_sphere for the extension name, but I think changing it at this point would be problematic for people who already have the extension installed. I think we are stuck with it, but I don't want to change anything else to match it.
So, basically, I wouldn't change anything.
I would prefer pgsphere as well. I agree we shouldn't rename the extension.
Some more questions:
- Should we use pgsphere when naming source files or doc files (like, pgsphere-1.3.1-A4.pdf)?
- Should we use pgSphere or PgSphere in doc titles?
For certainty, I would propose to use pgsphere for the following cases:
- Repository name
- File and directory naming (?)
- Documentation
Use pg_sphere:
- Module name
- Function names (like, pg_sphere_version)
Then, we may describe such naming chaos it in the doc.
I'd put a +1 on pgSphere, the spelling with PgS looks weird to me.