DEP-0, DEP0 or DEP 0?

[Otto Kekäläinen]

Hi all,

I am the kind of person that gets hugely annoyed by things like this.
Is anyone else feeling it?

Can we agree on calling Debian Enhancement Proposals DEP-N with a dash?

My eyes get sore when looking at commit messages like these:

* cd4d154 DEP 15: initial draft
* f54478c DEP8: Fix link to current specification
* 1f20e9d DEP-14: Version -> refname mangling: Escape dots

As the original DEP-0 used that in the title, I suggest we agree to
consistently spell it with a dash going forward. Anyone seconds?

[Sean Whitton]

Hello,

Post by Otto Kekäläinen
Hi all,
I am the kind of person that gets hugely annoyed by things like this.
Is anyone else feeling it?
Can we agree on calling Debian Enhancement Proposals DEP-N with a dash?
* cd4d154 DEP 15: initial draft
* f54478c DEP8: Fix link to current specification
* 1f20e9d DEP-14: Version -> refname mangling: Escape dots
As the original DEP-0 used that in the title, I suggest we agree to
consistently spell it with a dash going forward. Anyone seconds?

I always thought it was with a hyphen, indeed.

[Simon Josefsson]

Post by Otto Kekäläinen
Hi all,
I am the kind of person that gets hugely annoyed by things like this.
Is anyone else feeling it?
Can we agree on calling Debian Enhancement Proposals DEP-N with a dash?
* cd4d154 DEP 15: initial draft
* f54478c DEP8: Fix link to current specification
* 1f20e9d DEP-14: Version -> refname mangling: Escape dots
As the original DEP-0 used that in the title, I suggest we agree to
consistently spell it with a dash going forward. Anyone seconds?

I don't see "DEP-0" used in DEP 0?

It uses "DEP: 0", "DEP0" and "DEP 0" but no occurance of DEP-0.

Could you propose a DEP -1 to establish a recommended naming procedure?
Including how to escape negative numbers in the shortened form, for
which I suggest using DEP--1 to avoid confusion with DEP-1.

:)

/Simon

[Niels Thykier]

Post by Simon Josefsson
[...]
Could you propose a DEP -1 to establish a recommended naming procedure?
Including how to escape negative numbers in the shortened form, for
which I suggest using DEP--1 to avoid confusion with DEP-1.
:)
/Simon

Surely, the short form of DEP--1 would be DEP+1 since
-(-1) is +1. This would also ensure maximum confusion.

To add some real value to this thread. I am fine with the DEP-X variant.

Best regards,
Niels

[Jonathan Dowland]

Post by Niels Thykier
Surely, the short form of DEP--1 would be DEP+1 since
-(-1) is +1. This would also ensure maximum confusion.

I've long encouraged defaulting to prefix decrement operator in C, to
avoid some sequence point errors, so to continue that I would think
DEP--1 was better written --DEP1.

Joking aside I support standardizing on "DEP-1".

[Marc Haber]

On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 16:54:29 +0000, "Jonathan Dowland"

Post by Jonathan Dowland
Joking aside I support standardizing on "DEP-1".

This.

[Otto Kekäläinen]

Thanks for the comments!

Let's implement this. Please vote on which variant you prefer by
giving a thumbs up at

https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/13
Unify DEP spelling with a dash instead of a space (e.g. "DEP-0")

OR

https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/14
Unify DEP spelling with a space instead of dash (e.g. "DEP 0")


I apologize that this requires JavaScript to those who are concerned.
I don't know how to +1 in the GitLab API from the command line, so I
can't offer that as an option now, but I can provide direct links to
raw diff so you can at least read these without having to run
JavaScript:
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/13.patch
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/14.patch

[Mathias Behrle]

* Otto Kekäläinen: " Re: DEP-0, DEP0 or DEP 0?" (Sun, 17 Nov 2024 15:23:50
-0800):

Hi Otto,

Post by Otto Kekäläinen
Let's implement this. Please vote on which variant you prefer by
giving a thumbs up at
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/13
Unify DEP spelling with a dash instead of a space (e.g. "DEP-0")
OR
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/14
Unify DEP spelling with a space instead of dash (e.g. "DEP 0")
I apologize that this requires JavaScript to those who are concerned.
I don't know how to +1 in the GitLab API from the command line, so I
can't offer that as an option now, but I can provide direct links to
raw diff so you can at least read these without having to run
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/13.patch
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/14.patch

I know that you are working a lot on Salsa CI and that you like and promote the
platform. Not all in the project are at ease with gitlab. So please avoid
to change communication channels and put pressure on people to use that
platform for voting purposes that have a meaning to the project. Thanks!

I vote for DEP-0.

Cheers,
Mathias

[Soren Stoutner]

Post by Mathias Behrle
* Otto Kekäläinen: " Re: DEP-0, DEP0 or DEP 0?" (Sun, 17 Nov 2024 15:23:50
Hi Otto,

Post by Otto Kekäläinen
Let's implement this. Please vote on which variant you prefer by
giving a thumbs up at
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/13
Unify DEP spelling with a dash instead of a space (e.g. "DEP-0")
OR
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/14
Unify DEP spelling with a space instead of dash (e.g. "DEP 0")
I apologize that this requires JavaScript to those who are concerned.
I don't know how to +1 in the GitLab API from the command line, so I
can't offer that as an option now, but I can provide direct links to
raw diff so you can at least read these without having to run
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/13.patch
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/14.patch

I know that you are working a lot on Salsa CI and that you like and promote
the platform. Not all in the project are at ease with gitlab. So please

avoid

Post by Mathias Behrle
to change communication channels and put pressure on people to use that
platform for voting purposes that have a meaning to the project. Thanks!
I vote for DEP-0.

I actually think that using two merge requests like this with the thumbs-up
options is a really good way to get group feedback without the need for a
large number of emails. For simple decisions like this, I would hope we do
more of it.

[Otto Kekäläinen]

Your are right Simon, the body actually says "DEP0" and only title has
DEP-0 (
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/blob/master/web/deps/dep0.mdwn#L1).
The changelog even has "DEP 0".

Front page of dep-team.pages.debian.net spells it with a space.. The role
model https://peps.python.org/pep-0001/ also uses space, but dash (and
padding) in the filename. RFCs also use space. Maybe I should withdraw
proposal to standardize on the dash..

I don't care which spelling we choose, I just want it to be consistent.

[Soren Stoutner]

Post by Otto Kekäläinen
Your are right Simon, the body actually says "DEP0" and only title has
DEP-0 (
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/blob/master/web/deps/dep0.mdwn#L1).
The changelog even has "DEP 0".
Front page of dep-team.pages.debian.net spells it with a space.. The role
model https://peps.python.org/pep-0001/ also uses space, but dash (and
padding) in the filename. RFCs also use space. Maybe I should withdraw
proposal to standardize on the dash..
I don't care which spelling we choose, I just want it to be consistent.

While it obviously wasn’t standardized from the beginning, I am in favor of it
becoming standardized. Of all the available options, I personally like DEP-0
the best.

[Marc Haber]

Post by Otto Kekäläinen
Your are right Simon, the body actually says "DEP0" and only title has
DEP-0 (
https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/blob/master/web/deps/dep0.mdwn#L1).
The changelog even has "DEP 0".
Front page of dep-team.pages.debian.net spells it with a space.. The role
model https://peps.python.org/pep-0001/ also uses space, but dash (and
padding) in the filename. RFCs also use space. Maybe I should withdraw
proposal to standardize on the dash..
I don't care which spelling we choose, I just want it to be consistent.

While it obviously wasn’t standardized from the beginning, I am in favor of it
becoming standardized. Of all the available options, I personally like DEP-0
the best.

I agree with Soren here.

And, the beginning of this thread belongs on debian-curiosa. I had a
couple of really relieving chuckles when reading, thanks to you all
for that.

Greetings
Marc

[Julien Plissonneau Duquène]

Post by Niels Thykier
Surely, the short form of DEP--1 would be DEP+1 since
-(-1) is +1. This would also ensure maximum confusion.

Nay. DEP~1

Post by Niels Thykier
To add some real value to this thread. I am fine with the DEP-X variant.

+1

Cheers,

[Holger Levsen]

Post by Otto Kekäläinen
As the original DEP-0 used that in the title, I suggest we agree to
consistently spell it with a dash going forward. Anyone seconds?

I'm all for consistancy too, thus I would suggest dep0, as this is what's
written in the URLs.

Shall we document this as dep18? According to https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/
it's the next free one...

;)
--
cheers,
Holger

⢀⣎⠟⠻⢶⣊⠀
⣟⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
⠈⠳⣄

Don’t believe everything you think.

[Guillem Jover]

Hi!

Post by Otto Kekäläinen
I am the kind of person that gets hugely annoyed by things like this.
Is anyone else feeling it?
·
Can we agree on calling Debian Enhancement Proposals DEP-N with a dash?

I'm also all for consistency, although I'm in general more annoyed
when I see references to DEP-N in debian/changelogs, with no context
or human explanation to what it refers to, instead of say "machine
readable changelog", as I have a tendency to forget these context-less
numbered specifications (I think I've only ever involuntarily committed
into memory RFC822/RFC2822, RFC4880/RFC9580, and iso-8859?), and we do
not even have that many DEPs. :)

Thanks,
Guillem