I like js in the name because it lets me know it's not a Java project. Most Sling projects are java and maven. So, repo naming is derived from maven artifact id and "java" does not need to be advertised. I am not sure about cli. I imagine exposing slingpackage operations as API so it can be used by other tools as a library as well.
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 1:35 AM Robert Munteanu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 2020-04-24 at 11:39 -0700, Henry Saginor wrote: > > I am happy to put up the repository name to a vote. Here are the > > choices > > and reasoning as I see it.. > > 1) github.com/apache/sling-slingpackager - short and filterable by > > sling- > > as project > > 2) github.com/apache/sling-js-slingpackager - the same as 1) but > > includes > > js to id it as a js project > > 3) github.com/apache/apache-sling-js-slingpackager - maps to npm org. > > I > > think this is better for compliance. But I am not sure. > > 4) github.com/apache/sling-apache-sling-js-slingpackager - also maps > > to npm > > org but starts with sling- to follow sling project conventions. > > Well, first - ASF Infra requires that we start the repo name with > 'sling-'. > > Personally, I think any repetition of 'sling' and 'apache' is > confusing, so I would go with either 'sling-packager' or 'sling-js- > packager'. > > I am not sure whether we need the 'js' part, since we don't advertise > 'java' for our packages ... Maybe include 'cli' somewhere, since it's a > CLI tool and would make it clear what the scope is? Just throwing out > ideas... > > > > > Also, can we move it to a new repo 1st and then figure out npm > > release? > > +1 > > Thanks, > Robert > >
