[Savannah-hackers] Re: FOO.gnu.org

[Richard Stallman]

    Is the "for all supported values of FOO" a problem?

I don't know--that's what I'm asking you.
Maybe we are failing to communicate.

    Maybe the question is, do we care about establishing any kind of
    consistency for (virtual) hostnames?  E.G. - should a project named "GNU
    FOO" be called "gnufoo" or "foo"?  Technically, it doesn't matter.

That has always been inconsistent.  Each package has a custom, and
they are different.  People always say "GNU Chess", sometimes say "GNU
Emacs", and in practice never say "GNU Bison" althought it would not
be wrong to say that.  It would be quite a pain to try to change all
these conventions to make them uniform.

Perhaps we should simply support both versions for each package.
gnu-chess.gnu.org and chess.gnu.org, gnu-emacs.gnu.org and
emacs.gnu.org, gnu-bison.gnu.org and bison.gnu.org.  Or should the
dashes be omitted?