Given the existence of app-misc/neofetch which has been unworked on by upstream since December 2021 (Dylan Araps seems to have not been doing anything since then, so I do hope he's well), and the existence of app-misc/hyfetch which is actively maintaining its copy of neofetch, it seems that `neofetch` should be provided by app-alternatives. The default installation of hyfetch in Gentoo provides the script `neowofetch` which is a little cumbersome to type; this improvement would allow hyfetch to provide neofetch, wrangle app-misc/hyfetch to install its neofetch as `neofetch` instead of `neowofetch`, and permit for users of the plain upstream neofetch to be largely unaffected.
None of this requires an app-alternatives. I highly doubt any users need all of them installed at once, so hyftech upstream can simply start installing neofetch and gentoo can mark the two packages as conflicting. That's really all it takes. hyfetch should have no objection to installing /usr/bin/neofetch since, as you say, they are equal and merit having the same name.
Upstream currently has taken the stance of not wanting to install the script as `neofetch`, at least as of the last time she gave an opinion on the matter. So upstream likely won't make that change, but there's no reason that in the Gentoo package we can't make that change. The current state of the package has it more inline with the Debian and OpenSUSE packages, which are the other ones I maintain. But if there's interest in having `neowofetch` -> `neofetch` in this version then I can implement that.
(In reply to Bailey Kasin from comment #2) > Upstream currently has taken the stance of not wanting to install the script > as `neofetch`, at least as of the last time she gave an opinion on the > matter. So upstream likely won't make that change, but there's no reason > that in the Gentoo package we can't make that change. that is actually a reason we would not want to do that - we rarely make decisions that disagree with upstreams, and usually, it's something that upstream would be receptive to but has not done yet.
(In reply to Arsen Arsenović from comment #3) > (In reply to Bailey Kasin from comment #2) > > Upstream currently has taken the stance of not wanting to install the script > > as `neofetch`, at least as of the last time she gave an opinion on the > > matter. So upstream likely won't make that change, but there's no reason > > that in the Gentoo package we can't make that change. > > that is actually a reason we would not want to do that - we rarely make > decisions that disagree with upstreams, and usually, it's something that > upstream would be receptive to but has not done yet. Ah okay, that makes sense. Then yeah, as things currently stand upstream does not want to make that change on their side.
Given upstream don't want this, the maintainer of the package in Gentoo isn't keen, it's inconsistent with other distros, and it's - no offence - not exactly a critical tool, I don't think there's much point in spending time on this. Maybe create a shell alias?
