Giters

typst / packages

Packages for Typst.

Geek Repo:Geek Repo

Github PK Tool:Github PK Tool

Proposal to rename this repository to something more identifiable

figsoda opened this issue · comments

commented

Proposal

I am proposing to rename this repository to something more identifiable, e.g. typkgs, instead of packages which is what we have right now. This is a very common pattern with repositories like crates.io, pypi, and npm

Motivation

  • This will give it a shorter and canonical name to refer to: typkgs vs. typst package repository
  • Open up possibilities for alternative package repositories. If alternative package repositories or packages without repositories were to be implemented. Renaming this will make it less ambiguous and reduce the potential confusion.
  • Third party tooling: This will make naming third party tools that interact specifically with this repository easier.

Drawbacks

  • This is a rename and people will need to adapt to the changes. The impact is minimal if we do this early, since GitHub will be able to handle the redirects.
  • Opportunity for bike shedding: Naming is hard, and people will have different opinions. This is not much of an issue for something generic like packages.
commented

Easier to search

For me it showed up as the second hit after typst/typst and the package list in the docs showed up third. Maybe Google just needed a bit of time?

commented

Good point, I think google just needed time, I've removed that one

commented

I like the current name and it is also in line with the domain used to serve the packages (packages.typst.org) and that can't change at this point.

This will give it a shorter and canonical name to refer to

That's fair enough, but I don't think it's that much of an issue to call it the "typst package repository".

Open up possibilities for alternative package repositories ... Renaming this will make it less ambiguous and reduce the potential confusion.

I don't think that this would really be blocked by the name. Besides, what's more interesting (at least to me) than completely alternate registries is team/university-local packages, but these can just be namespaces.

... packages without repositories were to be implemented

If we move to packages without repositories, we will most probably still keep the existing packages, we will just move to them to another storage. (Unless we decide to retire @preview at the same time.)

This will make naming third party tools that interact specifically with this repository easier.

Overall, I see your points to an extent but the issues all seem pretty minor and the current name is nice and clear in my opinion, so I would refrain from changing it.

I also asked on Discord and the consensus seems to be that the current name is liked.