On 05/27/2015 08:55 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (26/05/15 20:49), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
> On 05/26/2015 07:56 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (26/05/15 13:03), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>> On 05/26/2015 09:25 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>> It's better to do not mix utility functions.
>>>> So feel free to split file to subfiles if it will be used among many
files
>>>> or include helper function directly to module. You can later extract
helper
>>>> function to another utility module when there will be use case.
>>>> (run_shell is not used atm)
>>>>
>>>> And here are proposed names. string_utils | utils_string | utils.string,
>>>> shell_utils (python already has shutil) ...
>>>
>>> Hmm, you asked me to change the "misc.py" name, but now you're
suggesting we
>>> should split it. Is it really worth it for three tiny functions? What if we
>>> just rename it to "util.py", or some other name which you find more
suitable?
>>>
>> OK, it does not worth to block patches
>
> Thank you :) Would you still like me to rename the file?
>
Yes, please.
So, should it be "util.py", or something else?
Nick