On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > >> On 26 May 2015, at 18:16, Ben Coman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Sean P. DeNigris <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Ben Coman wrote >>>> We should at least change the Nautilus title bar to "Nautilus System >>>> Browser" (or just "System Browser" ?) >>> >>> Part of the problem is that we have overloaded system categories to package >>> code for SCM. System categories should be tags (preferably multiple allowed) >>> which offer a logical view of the system. Packages, the POV we show now, are >>> orthogonal and much less useful for users. >>> >>> The other complication is that we have jumped onto the fad now to have cool >>> names for all software projects which offer no guidance as to what the code >>> actually does - a la Ruby, Sinatra, Rails. While this mysteriousness may >>> generate excitement for the project, it seems far less useful once we >>> integrate things in the image. What does/could Nautilus mean to a new user? >>> Taking a cue from Mac - the core apps are called Mail, Contacts, Maps, >>> Notes; not Sandcastle, Cabana, SkippingStone, and Umbrella ;) At least Opal >>> has the word Compiler attached to it! >> >> Agreed. Also take a cue from Microsoft and their successful >> applications (I wonder what they could possibly be uesed for?): >> * Word >> * SQLServer >> * Internet Explorer >> * Publisher >> * Media Player >> >> Of course the incumbent players have the luxury of already having an >> audience to take the dominant position on the app names. But the >> situation is a bit the same for tools delivered by by default with the >> standard Image. > > I disagree with this way. > We are not building an OS (regardless the original intentions of smalltalk) > and this profusion of names are generating more confusion than benefits, > thinking on new users. > For me, intention revealing names needs to be applied not just to the methods > and classes we code, but also the tools we use. Then, fantasy names are just > that, fantasy. > In fact, I was planning a couple of sessions to get an idea of how can we do > to have the system in a more clear way. Something like: > > - System Browser (Nautilus) > > then if we change it it can be > > - System Browser (GCoder) (Or whatever the name gtools guys are planning). > - System Browser (AltBrowser) > > or whatever… same for other “mysterious” tools like monticello (who can know > that monticello is a SCM, as a newbie?). > A lot better: > > - SCM (Monticello) > - SCM (Other) > > etc. > So… I think is better to change “Nautilus” title to “System Browser”.
The potential downside is a newcomer wanting to look look into the System Browser implementation, and not finding a class named "System Browser" to review. Maybe they would discover the ImplementationClass (e.g. Nautilus) anyway by digging into the tool using halos (?). > > Esteban > >> >> cheers -ben >> > >
