I'd be +1 and thanks for explaining.
Just using a descriptive name and keeping the concept open for various
design systems to be leveraged is a good approach and doesn't require
us to change anything later. Doing this now before a first release is
a big win as well. Also didn't realize these design systems were at
play so that is cool and would be good to have in the readme for sure.
Would help people that want to contribute have some frame of reference
to start from.
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Jeremy Dyer <jdy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Makes complete sense to me +1
> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:00 AM, Matt Burgess <mattyb...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Makes sense to me, I'm a +1 as well.
>> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Scott Aslan <scottyas...@gmail.com>
>> > Good timing as we're close to ready for a first nifi-fds release.
>> > I would definitely favor us keeping the 'nifi-fds' naming as that means I
>> > dont have to change a bunch of code so Apache NiFi Flow Design System
>> > that just fine. I will take care of updating the readme and other areas
>> > need to change but we can keep the repo as-is with this.
>> > The descriptive name is better, generic, and consistent with some of the
>> > discuss thread feedback a while back anyway.
>> > I'll wait to kick off the release for the outcome of this discussion and
>> > vote.
>> > I'm +1 on this.
>> > Thanks
>> > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 2:46 PM, Rob Moran <rmo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> I think it's important to highlight that for nifi-fds the 'f' part of
>> >> name was for 'fluid.' This is part of a FLUID product design system 
>> >> which I also contribute, that at the time was an internal concept, but
>> >> now being described in a public manner. However, nifi-fds is partially
>> >> inspired by FLUID concepts as well as others. Specifically, Material
>> >>  and Teradata's Covalent UI Platform .
>> >> We should change the name to reflect that what we're aiming for is a
>> set of
>> >> reusable UI components that the NiFi ecosystem can leverage. The UI
>> >> components are inspired by these design systems, and will possibly be
>> >> influenced by others as it evolves.
>> >> Since we've already established the FDS naming scheme, I propose a
>> >> path would be to call it the Apache NiFi *Flow* Design System rather
>> than a
>> >> unique/standalone term. This way the nifi-fds repo will not require a
>> >> change. We can just update the descriptions.
>> >> I assume we should vote on this if others agree?
>> >>  http://productdesign.hortonworks.com/
>> >>  https://material.io/design/
>> >>  https://teradata.github.io/covalent/#/