Stephane Ducasse-3 wrote > I like when developers are talking about names: > They use a mac and not a computer, they were nike, lewis and not shoes > and pants.... > So guys can we focus our energy on positive things.
IHMO this is certainly a positive subject because it highlights the as-yet-to-be-resolved tension regarding understandability of the system between having a unique name (good for googling, distinguishing between versions) and a name that reveals what the project does/is for. What is the plan to resolve this because it is a real problem? Nike and Levis are designed to stand on their own in front of the consumer market. Is this true of Nautilus, Calypso, or Epicea? A more relevant example of products that are geared to be presented to consumers as /part of/ another more-uniquely-named product come to mind: OS release codenames: - Mac - OS X 10.11: El Capitan and macOS 10.12: Sierra. Note that they didn't just invent a random-seeming fabricated name and tell people to get over it, they also provide a number which situates it in its domain. - Interestingly Windows has moved back to boring release numbers and has dropped the fantasy names Possible solutions: - Make project tags /the primary view for new users when searching the system. There is a lot of talk about students and having to explain confusing things to them. Would it not be more straightforward to look for a "Class Browser" or "SCM" category?! - If projects are designed just-for-pharo, maybe borrow another trick from OS X - have a codename for development (like Fuji for Sierra) and then change it to something more generic on release, like Browser3, although now that we seem to be keeping tools in their own project repos, that might be problematic I summary, IMHO it is important to provide both: - A clear, searchable, pragmatic way to navigate/understand the system - As well as the unique, google-able, but usually undescriptive way we have now ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
