uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam Lally (JIRA)" <uima-...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (UIMA-373) UIMA's Unix command line utilities are named badly
Date Fri, 13 Apr 2007 15:10:15 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-373?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12488697

Adam Lally commented on UIMA-373:

Can we have both?  I wouldn't want to disorient our users who had gotten used to the .sh versions.
 The extension-less command could just call the .sh version (or vice-versa) so there wouldn't
have to be duplicate files to maintain.  A symbolic link might be better, but I'm not sure
how to do that and maintain a platform-independent built process.

> UIMA's Unix command line utilities are named badly
> --------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: UIMA-373
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-373
>             Project: UIMA
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Core Java Framework
>         Environment: Unix
>            Reporter: Eddie Epstein
> UIMA command line utilities are available in two flavors: commandName.bat for Windows
and commandName.sh for Unix. The Unix world typically does not use an extension for scripts.
> In addition to looking dumb, my real peeve with the .sh extension is how it complicates
writing documentation, saying things like "using the cpeGui shell script (cpeGui.bat on Windows,
cpeGui.sh on Unix)". Dropping .sh would allow the documentation to just say "using commandName".

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message