Seems reasonable. Is that page intended to load in under 15 minutes or are we 
having server issues again?

On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 19:55:13 +0200
Xavi Artigas <xavierarti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> This is an idea of what I had in mind:
> https://www.enlightenment.org/playground/choose-your-api.md
> 
> Xavi
> 
> On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 17:39, Mike Blumenkrantz <
> michael.blumenkra...@gmail.com> wrote:  
> 
> > I agree with the point that newcomers will have no idea what EO is (and
> > they should not need to know). It's best to have naming targeted at the
> > newcomer demographic since any developers which are already invested in the
> > community will inherently know which API is being referred to regardless of
> > what we name it.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 10:34 AM Xavi Artigas <xavierarti...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >  
> > > The problem I see with EO is that newcomers don't know what it is, so it
> > > needs to be introduced.
> > > But then again, we could do something similar: *Components (Classic)*
> > > vs *Unified
> > > (EO)*.
> > > I have been envisioning for a while a first page on the Developers  
> > section,  
> > > clearly split in two, saying:
> > > CHOOSE YOUR POISON
> > > And a paragraph explaining each of the two options.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 16:12, Carsten Haitzler <ras...@rasterman.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >  
> > > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 15:31:46 +0200 Xavi Artigas <  
> > xavierarti...@gmail.com>  
> > > > said:
> > > >  
> > > > > Thank you all for your feedback!
> > > > >
> > > > > My comments:
> > > > > Universal works too, but I think Unified is more specific as to its  
> > > > purpose.  
> > > > > I wasn't sure about the Classic name so I welcome alternatives. I  
> > like  
> > > > > Components because it clearly states its problem. However, we would  
> > > need  
> > > > to  
> > > > > explain that "the API that you have been using so far is now called
> > > > > Components API", whereas you don't need to do that if you call it
> > > > > "Classic". How about "Components (Classic) API", or "Classic  
> > > (Components)  
> > > > > API"?
> > > > > Synonyms for Components: Split, Detached, Separated.
> > > > > Aaaaaaaand I don't like Best and Worst because we can do better than  
> > > the  
> > > > > new API and I fear we can do worse than the legacy API :)  
> > > >
> > > > We gave been calling them LEGACY and EO API. Legacy isn't going away  
> > any  
> > > > time
> > > > soon at all. It'll require a lot of things be ported over first, and in
> > > > fact Eo
> > > > API will need to get a lot of expansion and improvements to even make  
> > > that  
> > > > possible, so it's going to take a long time. Given that this will be
> > > > around for
> > > > a long time, probably something like CLASSIC vs. EO will do. EO API is
> > > > pretty
> > > > exact on the dot as to what it's based on. CLASSIC is what has  
> > > classically  
> > > > been
> > > > around for a long time... and likely will be for a while.
> > > >  
> > > > > Xavi
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 14:15, Mike Blumenkrantz <  
> > > > > michael.blumenkra...@gmail.com> wrote:  
> > > > >  
> > > > > > I'd prefer "component" and "unified". They say the classics never  
> > go  
> > > > out of  
> > > > > > style, but they do.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 5:32 AM Xavi Artigas <  
> > xavierarti...@gmail.com  
> > > >  
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > > Hello everybody,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > TL;DR: Current docs are a mess because of inconsistent naming of  
> > > the  
> > > > two  
> > > > > > > APIs (old and new). I propose we call them Classic and Unified  
> > and  
> > > > revamp  
> > > > > > > the docs site.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As you know, we have all been laboring in the past years to  
> > produce  
> > > > a new  
> > > > > > > API for EFL that presents a unified look (instead of a collection 
> > > > > > >  
> > > of  
> > > > > > > libraries), and which is described through a high-level language  
> > > > (Eolian)  
> > > > > > > so it is straightforward to write bindings for languages other  
> > > than C  
> > > > > > > (instead of having to write and maintain manual bindings).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This new API is now mature enough that parts of it have been  
> > > declared  
> > > > > > > stable and will be shipped in this release (1.22) without BETA  
> > > > markers.  
> > > > > > > This means apps can be written using this API without requesting  
> > > any  
> > > > > > > special BETA access, and they have a certain degree of confidence 
> > > > > > >  
> > > > that  
> > > > > > they  
> > > > > > > will continue working in future versions of EFL without change.  
> > > > Actually,  
> > > > > > > only the Window class has been stabilized, so no great apps will  
> > > > come out  
> > > > > > > of it, but we're getting there.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Unfortunately, we never agreed to any name for this new API  
> > (that I  
> > > > am  
> > > > > > > aware of), which makes things hard to document:
> > > > > > > - The old API is being called Legacy API, but that's confusing  
> > > > because  
> > > > > > it's  
> > > > > > > the ONLY API apps can currently use.
> > > > > > > - The new API has been called Interfaces API, but that is  
> > confusing  
> > > > > > because  
> > > > > > > "interface" is a programming term, and they are present in both  
> > > APIs.  
> > > > > > > - Beta API is also a bad name, because parts of the old API are  
> > > still  
> > > > > > beta,  
> > > > > > > and parts of the new API are not beta anymore.
> > > > > > > - And obviously "old" and "new" are extremely non-future-proof  
> > > names  
> > > > for  
> > > > > > an  
> > > > > > > API. What are we going to call the new one? (say "newer", I dare  
> > > > you).  
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > THEREFORE, I propose we start calling the old API "*Classic API*" 
> > > > > > >  
> > > > and the  
> > > > > > > new one "*Unified API*".
> > > > > > > The Unified API presents a unified look of the library, and  
> > > contains  
> > > > all  
> > > > > > > EFL symbol starting with efl_ or eina_.
> > > > > > > Conversely, the Classic API is a collection of libraries which  
> > have  
> > > > grown  
> > > > > > > organically over the years (hence "Classic") and contains the  
> > rest  
> > > of  
> > > > > > > symbols (evas_, ecore_, edje_, ...)
> > > > > > > This naming will only affect documentation (website, tutorials,  
> > > > reference  
> > > > > > > guide). No changes in code.
> > > > > > > It might not seem like a big deal, but the current state of our  
> > > docs  
> > > > is  
> > > > > > > pretty confusing, and having things properly named and introduced 
> > > > > > >  
> > > > will  
> > > > > > help  
> > > > > > > newcomers a lot. And we do want newcomers, right?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So please share your thoughts about the Classic and Unified  
> > names,  
> > > > make  
> > > > > > > other proposals if you wish, and I'll start revamping the docs  
> > > site.  
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Xavi
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list
> > > > > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
> > > > > > >  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list
> > > > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
> > > > > >  
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > enlightenment-devel mailing list
> > > > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
> > > > >  
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am"  
> > --------------  
> > > > Carsten Haitzler - ras...@rasterman.com
> > > >
> > > >  
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > enlightenment-devel mailing list
> > > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
> > >  
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > enlightenment-devel mailing list
> > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
> >  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> enlightenment-devel mailing list
> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel


_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel

Reply via email to