Conversation
|
I am not against this change, but please let's avoid an holy war on renaming... |
|
it's the only package which is named badly without a reason. Before we go ahead and use it in many other packages, i would suggest to fix the name. |
|
You know why I say that : it adds nothing and may leave bug behind. Try to install |
|
Another thing is : it's not named badly without a reason. It was created following exactly what the documentation prescribes. If other software packagers decides to use CamelCase in a I find it more annoying that something prescribed in the docs doesn't work rather than a name in CamelCase. Of course this may be just my personal taste. |
|
i see you point. I grepped for |
|
as always, this is just a proposition. I ain't gonna be pissed of if the PR is not merged 😄 |
|
Naturally, nothing personal intended, my comments were just to share my opinion on this. If I am minority and people want to merge I'll also get along with it 😄 |
|
I'm leaving this up to @alalazo. I'm kind of agnostic and So up to you @alalazo. |
|
I am not against this change in particular, so it's fine with me to merge. My point more generally is that usually renaming spates bring more troubles than benefits : you know today it's suite sparse, tomorrow all the python modules... 😄 |
as nobody objected renaming
suite sparsehere #580, that's what this PR is about.