Quick Poll on a naming issue...

Thomas Segismont tsegismo at redhat.com
Fri Apr 19 07:42:07 UTC 2013


+1

Le 18/04/2013 23:26, Larry O'Leary a écrit :
> I like rhqctl myself.
>
> Of course, I still do not understand why the .sh extension is used. .sh
> indicates that the script is an include or should be passed to a shell
> using:
>
>     . rhqctl.sh
>     source rhqctl.sh
>
> Or:
>
>     sh rhqctl.sh
>     bash rhqctl.sh
>
>
> Where as: "rhqctl" (no extension with execute attribute set) on *nix
> allows one to use the same command on Windows and *nix platforms:
>
> Linux:
>     ./rhqctl start
> Windows
>     rhqctl start
>
> And documentation no longer has to say rhqctl.[sh|cmd].
>
> Any way, just one of my pet peeves. :)
>



More information about the rhq-devel mailing list