Is it D-Bus, DBus, D-BUS or dbus?

[Evan Martin]

One thing to consider is that language bindings will force their own names.
I have a nearly-releasable binding for Haskell, and I've been
referring to it as "DBus" because you can't use hyphens in module
names.

(I think I picked up this particular spelling of the name because I
also saw DBus throughout the source in names like DBusMessage, again
because of C's naming limitations.)  So even if it's called D-Bus,
none of the code or docs I write will be able to refer to it like
that.

On 7/14/06, John (J5) Palmieri <johnp at redhat.com> wrote:
> As we move towards 1.0 it is the little things that we need to start to
> clean up.  To that end I would like to get a consensus on how we should
> present the "D-Bus brand".  It is important to have a unified front here
> because it is one of those little easy things that makes the project
> look more polished and allow people who write about D-Bus to not have to
> stop and ask people "how do I write the actual word".
>
> Personally I prefer D-Bus since it highlights the important bits.
> However all the documentation we have and most of the wiki uses D-BUS
> which is a bit bold but there you have it.  Some of the newer stuff uses
> DBus but I feel this is wrong (looks like a typo of Bus).
>
> Being of the less work is more fun camp I propose we stick with D-BUS.
> It is not the most visually appealing but it does have precedence and
> I'm not going to be the one who goes through the docs and wiki to change
> all the instances.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> John (J5) Palmieri <johnp at redhat.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dbus mailing list
> dbus at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus
>