[plt-dev] renaming programs in the distribution

I've pushed a rename of `rico' to `racket-tool' so we can try it out.

At Wed, 21 Apr 2010 06:43:58 -0600, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> Since the vote is split evenly between 1A and 3, I think that 1B is the
> right compromise:
> 
>  * It keeps `racket' as a REPL plus program launcher.
> 
>  * It puts "racket" into the command program's name.
> 
>  * It avoids fragile heuristics on filenames versus commands.
> 
> The name `racket-tool' is too long for me, but after aliasing `rt' to
> `racket-tool' (and `r' to `racket') in my shell, I expect to be
> completely happy with 1B.
> 
> At Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:38:49 -0600, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> > Here are the plausible options we came up with on the IRC channel:
> > 
> >  1: Keep `racket' plus a separate command tool
> >   1A: Keep `rico' as the command tool (i.e., status quo)
> >   1B: Rename `rico' to `racket-tool'
> > 
> >  2: Rename `racket' to `racket-run', rename `rico' to `racket', add a
> >     `racket run' command, and let `racket' (no command) still provide a
> >     REPL
> > 
> >  3: Like 2, but let `racket' guess whether its first argument is a
> >     command or a file name so that `racket <file>' often works (i.e.,
> >     the most recent proposal, but amended with `racket-run' for
> >     scripts)
> > 
> > 1A is obviously best, because it fits existing conventions.
> > 1A is obviously worst, because `rico' doesn't contain "Racket".
> > 
> > 1B acceptably fixes the problem with `rico' by adding "racket".
> > 1B leaves us with an unacceptably long and ugly tool name, as will
> >    anything that starts "racket".
> > 
> > 2 works well, since it makes `racket' the one executable for
> >   everything.
> > 2 doesn't work, because users expect `racket <file>' to to run the
> >   file.
> > 
> > 3 looks like the best combination; it almost always does what you'd
> >   expect, and the only real trouble shows up with people who put "." in
> >   their PATH, which is a typical newbie mistake that we shouldn't try
> >   to accommodate. [But I have "." in my PATH.]
> > 3 looks suspiciously like an attempt to innovate; it's unusual, it has
> >   surprising corner cases, and it interacts awkwardly with tab
> >   completion.
> > 
> > 
> > I can live with any of the options.
> > 
> > My vote, most preferred to least:
> > '(3 1B 1A 2)
> > 
> > _________________________________________________
> >   For list-related administrative tasks:
> >   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev
> _________________________________________________
>   For list-related administrative tasks:
>   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev