Open nathansobo opened 10 years ago
I like this idea. It is probably a low priority but we could add a warning to apm init or apm publish.
I also added a line to the your first package
doc https://github.com/atom/atom/pull/1716
I think the atom-
prefix should be reserved for packages made by the Atom team. This way, it is more obvious if something is third-party or made by the creators of the editor.
in my case (very common): I've made a package for working with supercollider. (it includes a REPL, language grammar. not just snippets). I cannot call it 'supercollider' because that is the main project. it is "atom-supercollider" by common parlance. or should it be "supercollider-atom" ?
I would name the repository atom-supercollider
, but not the package itself in the registry.
honestly I cannot even publish due to this bug: #150
apm publish
Package must pushed up to GitHub before publishing: https://help.github.com/articles/create-a-repo
I actually did have the name as "supercollider", the repo as "atom-supercollider" https://github.com/crucialfelix/atom-supercollider.git and just now changed the name in an attempt to find some way to get it to publish.
many suggestions in forums say it has to do with renaming. I've been stumped for over an hour
Weird. Looks like your package.json
is correctly pointing to the repository. @kevinsawicki @thedaniel, any insight here?
@nathansobo I think this is an apm issue. See my comment on #150
Interesting suggestion via email: The guy suggests disallowing
atom-
package name prefixes. I think a gentle message could be a better choice.Feel free to close this issue, but thought it was a good enough idea to warrant one.