|
|
|
|
|
|
by igor_chubin
2900 days ago
|
|
|
We are of course aware of the beautiful cheat project and we even use it (what is documented in our README.md file), but please keep in mind that: 1. Our project is called cheat.sh and not cheat (for example xterm.js and xterm are two separated projects and xterm existed for decades before xterm.js; should they be renamed too from your point of view?); 2. We are trying to mitigate the impact by using cht.sh where possible; 3. We do not and did not ever use the name to steal, to borrow, or to somehow use popularity of cheat. I do not see any naming conflict actually. The client/command is called cht.sh, does not even have cheat in their name. I am a big fan of the cheat project myself, and I don't want to do any harm for it. Even more, as I said, I would prefer that we cooperate with that project. |
|
|
sh is not a distinct enough term when googling for shell suggestions, because both cheat and cheat.sh will have sh in the results. That is very distinct from xterm.js where xterm-only results are very unlikely to have JS in them.
A similar debate played out when the gofish package manager was launched, which conflicted with the fish shell https://github.com/fishworks/gofish/issues/37
Anyway, the choice is not mine to make, it just seems like an easy issue that could have been avoided by choosing a name that wasn't already in use.