[...] > What I have down for the feature name may be a bit more controversial. > I'm thinking of this from the consumer's point of view: the project name > isn't generally interesting (unless you've mounted a serious > brand-recognition campaign); it is the functionality provided by the > feature that needs to be related. > > IMHO, the EGit project does a decent job of this. The feature name is > "Git Team Provider" and the provider name is "Eclipse EGit". Other > features include "Task focused interface for Eclipse Git Team Provider". > It's immediately clear what these features provide. They even provide > some helpful information in the description of the feature.
I disagree with you on that. I think it has value that the project name is in the feature name and the reason it simple: Better grouping on the p2-Update-UI! Uncheck the "Group itemy by category" and discover that you'd never have found that "Task focused ..." but now imagine you know Mylyn or EGit and it would have been found next to all other mylyn/egit entries you'd had a much easier life! So I'm -1 on the proposal to drop the project name! Tom -- Thomas Schindl, CTO BestSolution.at EDV Systemhaus GmbH Eduard-Bodem-Gasse 5-7, A-6020 Innsbruck http://www.bestsolution.at/ Reg. Nr. FN 222302s am Firmenbuchgericht Innsbruck _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list [email protected] To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
