one more idea: what about "sf" in the ids, meaning "S1 Framework"?
sf-core could be the artifactId while "S1 Framework Core" is the name.


On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Turadg Aleahmad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I support the disruptive position.  If SAIL is a group of developers and an
> index of projects, which two weeks ago we collectively decided it is, no
> project should be more "SAIL" than another.  SAIL had become two things:
> software project and developer community.  We chose to keep the SAIL name
> for the developer community, so we need now to think of a new name for the
> software project.
> I like "s1" because it conveys that it is the first attempt at something
> and leaves room for a next generation codebase attempting the same thing.
>  That thing will happen within the SAIL community, not as it.
>
> As for the refactoring, I'm not in the code enough these days to have an
> informed opinion.  I think we could simply rename the projects to omit
> "sail" without doing the refactoring, but the work that that takes in
> reconfiguring IDEs may merit doing any pending refactorings at the same
> time.
>
> Still, let's figure out the name as a separate discussion.  I like Scott's
> "s1" idea.  Any others?  Any objections to renaming?
>
> Speaking of renaming, "Scalable Architecture for Interactive Learning" no
> longer describes very well the object of the SAIL name.  I'll start another
> thread on that on SAIL-Discuss.
>
> -t
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 5:05 PM, Scott Cytacki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>>
>> Now that Sail is a group of developers and an index of projects, should
>> any one project use Sail in its name?
>>
>> My disruptive inclination is to say no.  This way there will be less
>> confusion about "What is Sail?".
>>
>> Which means we should rename/refactor:
>> sail-core
>> sail-data-emf
>> sail-otrunk
>>
>> Perhaps for now just turn "sail" into "s1" short for "sail version 1".
>>
>> sail-core -> s1-core
>> sail-data-emf -> s1-data-emf
>> sail-otrunk -> s1-otrunk
>>
>> We could spend more time refactoring this stuff, but I'm not sure how
>> long it is going to live.
>> For example we'd all like to have repository backed learner data, in one
>> case this means replacing sds with roolo.  This could also take some
>> other form.  But in any case sail-data-emf would probably not be used
>> anymore.   And in that case perhaps the majority of sail-core might go
>> too.
>>
>> One considerations about this is a lot of tweaking has gone in to
>> sail-data-emf to help with problems we've found in the schools.  If it
>> is replaced then we need to be careful to include most of those tweaks.
>> This includes:
>> - dealing with incorrectly set computer clocks
>> - dealing with cached learner data that is gets sent up out of order
>> - dealing with changes to the learner data schema
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> >>
>>
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"SAIL-Dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/SAIL-Dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to