pgsphere or pg_sphere?

[vitcpp]

The repository name is pgsphere. The extension name is pg_sphere. The document uses pgSphere. The names are not consistent. I propose to think about this problem.

[df7cb]

Not the same question, but there's also a giant dichotomy between the naming of SQL functions and C functions, e.g. scircle_* vs spherecircle_*. And half of the C/SQL files are named pgs_* while the rest doesn't have a prefix. It's very confusing.

[esabol]

The repository name is pgsphere. The extension name is pg_sphere. The document uses pgSphere. The names are not consistent. I propose to think about this problem.

I much prefer pgsphere, and I think it's acceptable to use pgSphere in the documentation.

I really don't like pg_sphere for the extension name, but I think changing it at this point would be problematic for people who already have the extension installed. I think we are stuck with it, but I don't want to change anything else to match it.

So, basically, I wouldn't change anything.

[vitcpp]

I would prefer pgsphere as well. I agree we shouldn't rename the extension.

Some more questions:

• Should we use pgsphere when naming source files or doc files (like, pgsphere-1.3.1-A4.pdf)?
• Should we use pgSphere or PgSphere in doc titles?

For certainty, I would propose to use pgsphere for the following cases:

• Repository name
• File and directory naming (?)
• Documentation

Use pg_sphere:

• Module name
• Function names (like, pg_sphere_version)

Then, we may describe such naming chaos it in the doc.

[df7cb]

I'd put a +1 on pgSphere, the spelling with PgS looks weird to me.