No standard for module naming #518

New Issue

2026-10-05T04:26:52+02:00

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:26:52 +02:00

We do not have a standard for module names.

A large number of the modules are multiple words as one, such as the now retired awaynick module, or the keepnick module, or the autovoice or autoreply modules.

We also have a few modules (in 1.6.x) as route_replies, simple_away, block_motd and others.

I propose that we make the module naming standardized such that we have everything with one word, or with underscores to separate multiple words. Having mixed naming standards is a bad thing.

--- Want to back this issue? **[Post a bounty on it!](https://www.bountysource.com/issues/12421875-no-standard-for-module-naming?utm_campaign=plugin&utm_content=tracker%2F1759&utm_medium=issues&utm_source=github)** We accept bounties via [Bountysource](https://www.bountysource.com/?utm_campaign=plugin&utm_content=tracker%2F1759&utm_medium=issues&utm_source=github).

We do not have a standard for module names. A large number of the modules are multiple words as one, such as the now retired `awaynick` module, or the `keepnick` module, or the `autovoice` or `autoreply` modules. We also have a few modules (in 1.6.x) as `route_replies`, `simple_away`, `block_motd` and others. I propose that we make the module naming standardized such that we have everything with one word, or with underscores to separate multiple words. Having mixed naming standards is a bad thing. ## <bountysource-plugin> --- Want to back this issue? **[Post a bounty on it!](https://www.bountysource.com/issues/12421875-no-standard-for-module-naming?utm_campaign=plugin&utm_content=tracker%2F1759&utm_medium=issues&utm_source=github)** We accept bounties via [Bountysource](https://www.bountysource.com/?utm_campaign=plugin&utm_content=tracker%2F1759&utm_medium=issues&utm_source=github). </bountysource-plugin>

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:26:53 +02:00

If we're going to standardize on underscores/no underscores, I vote wholeheartedly for dropping the underscores.

If we're going to standardize on underscores/no underscores, I vote wholeheartedly for dropping the underscores.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:26:53 +02:00

If we're going to standardize on underscores/no underscores, I vote wholeheartedly for dropping the underscores.
-- @dgw

👍 (+1) for this, I think we should just drop the underscores since the majority of module names has no underscores.

> If we're going to standardize on underscores/no underscores, I vote wholeheartedly for dropping the underscores. > -- @dgw :+1: (+1) for this, I think we should just drop the underscores since the majority of module names has no underscores.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:26:54 +02:00

I think that the underscores make the names a little easier to read, but they have the major disadvatange of requiring two buttons to be pressed to make, so I probably also support dropping the underscores.

I think that the underscores make the names a little easier to read, but they have the major disadvatange of requiring two buttons to be pressed to make, so I probably also support dropping the underscores.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:26:55 +02:00

If the issue is readability vs pressing two buttons, why not replace _ with -. On most keyboard layouts globally the - key doesn't require a shift key.

If the issue is readability vs pressing two buttons, why not replace _ with -. On most keyboard layouts globally the - key doesn't require a shift key.

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:26:55 +02:00

@Cajs the issue is standardization - we need to have a standard for module naming, in my opinion, that either uses _ or - as spacing or has no such spacing characters in the name. That's the core reason for this issue

@Cajs the issue is standardization - we need to have a standard for module naming, in my opinion, that either uses _ or - as spacing or has no such spacing characters in the name. That's the core reason for this issue

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:26:56 +02:00

If the issue is readability vs pressing two buttons, why not replace _ with -. On most keyboard layouts globally the - key doesn't require a shift key.

👍

> If the issue is readability vs pressing two buttons, why not replace _ with -. On most keyboard layouts globally the - key doesn't require a shift key. :+1:

adam commented

2026-10-05 04:26:57 +02:00

@teward I understand that there is no standardization. I was stating, if the issue with using _ as a method of making it easier to read in the standardization is because it's harder to type, why not use another character which effectively does the same thing but doesn't have said drawback.

@teward I understand that there is no standardization. I was stating, if the issue with using _ as a method of making it easier to read in the standardization is because it's harder to type, why not use another character which effectively does the same thing but doesn't have said drawback.

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: adam/znc#518