Re: The Policy(tm)

[Braden McDaniel]

Quoting Guido Draheim <address@hidden>:

> Peter Simons schrieb:

[snip]

> >      2. No two macros in the archive should perform the same test. We
> >         do not wish to confuse (potentially inexperienced) Autoconf
> >         users by providing two competing macros for the same purpose.
> >         Instead, the existing macro's functionality should be enhanced
> >         to fulfill the requirements, or the existing macro should be
> >         replaced completely by a new submission.
> 
> There are a lot of places where two macros target the same test-area
> but they handle the result differently - like adding a default-source,
> adding a -Define somewhere, some introducing new --enabled extensions.
> However, (a) two macros should be named distinctivly enough to show
> these difference (b) the name should hint about the actual result (e.g.
> AX_HAVE and AX_WITH to differentiate -Definers and --enable'rs) and
> (c) we try hard to put up crosslinks between `variants` of the same
> functionality area and ask developers to accept that into the doc part
> of their macro submissions.

It should be part of the role of the review process to establish what approach
is superior. Having a macro in the archive replaced with a better one is a
perfectly acceptable outcome of the review process. So is rejecting a macro
that, while not a bad submission, does something that an existing macro already
does better.

Having macros with duplicate or overlapping functionality is a good way to
confuse users and bloat the archive with redundancy. It's also a good way to
avoid the contention that I realize is an inevitable part of the approach I'm
suggesting. I think that contention worth the utility this additional attention
would bring to the archive.

[snip]

> > Macro Naming Convention
> >
> >      1. Macro names must begin with the prefix AX_, what is short-hand
> >         for "Autoconf Extension".
> 
> s/must/should/ (i.e. good reason must be given when picking another).
> 
> >
> >      2. Macro names must be spelled in all upper-case and consist only
> >         of the letters of the (US-ASCII) alphabet, digits, and
> >         underscores.
> 
> s/must/should/ (i.e. good r....)

For example?

> >      3. The use of a second "prefix" after the initial AX_, such as
> >         the initials of the author etc., is not necessary, because the
> >         archive maintainers will ensure unique macro names throughout
> >         the archive.
> 
> ack. a\ the second word should tell of the test-kind (CHECK/HAVE/etc)
> to be easily recognizable. A variation token should instead be
> appended to the end of the macro if such is ever needed at all since
> archive maintainer will try hard to get a streamlined name anyway
> without initials of an author etc.

I think it's safe to say that this will not be a problem if macros with
duplicate functionality are not accepted into the archive.

-- 
Braden McDaniel                           e-mail: <address@hidden>
<http://endoframe.com>                    Jabber: <address@hidden>