Re:Unified access to the best community-driven cheat sheets ...
by nikisweeting on Wednesday July 11, 2018 @09:24AM
(#17506634)
The reasoning boils down to Google-ability.
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.
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.