Re: ox-* vs org-* naming convention?

[Diego Zamboni]

Hi Kaushal and Jens,

Thanks for your feedback, and also for the idea for the workaround
used in ox-re-reveal - that's a nice one :)

Given the special meanings of both the org- and ox- prefixes, I will
insist on keeping the current naming, and maybe take a stab at coming
up with a PR for https://github.com/purcell/package-lint/issues/89.

Cheers,
--Diego

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 7:54 AM Jens Lechtenboerger
<lechten@wi.uni-muenster.de> wrote:
>
> On 2020-06-07, Diego Zamboni wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am working on submitting a new set of exporters I've been working on
> > (https://gitlab.com/zzamboni/ox-leanpub) to MELPA, and I received
> > feedback [1] about the discrepancy between the package names
> > (ox-leanpub-*) and the functions they define (org-leanpub-*). This is
> > also flagged by =package-lint=.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/melpa/melpa/pull/6942
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > I would appreciate any feedback about this - what are strong arguments
> > for or against insisting in this convention vs just adapting to the
> > rules suggested by package-lint?
>
> Hi there,
>
> for org-re-reveal, I use a small wrapper ox-re-reveal.el [2], whose
> commentary explains this:
>
> ;; Org export back-ends have file names starting with "ox-".
> ;; However, such files typically define variables and functions
> ;; starting with "org-", which causes errors by package-lint.  To
> ;; define variables and functions with the usual prefix "org-" while
> ;; avoiding errors by package-lint, code is located in
> ;; org-re-reveal.el.
> ;; However, the prefix "ox-" is hard-coded in org.el and used to load
> ;; back-ends in `org-export-backends'.  With this file, you can
> ;; customize `org-export-backends' and add `re-reveal'.  Then, when
> ;; pressing `C-c C-e', this file will be loaded, which loads
> ;; org-re-reveal.el.
>
> Best wishes
> Jens
>
> [2] https://gitlab.com/oer/org-re-reveal/-/blob/master/ox-re-reveal.el