On 28-Oct-08, at 5:19 AM, Scott Cytacki wrote:

>
> My gut reaction is that "sf" stands for sourceforge.
>
or "San Francisco" (which I think is kindof a nice feature, I guess  
out of nostalgia) - I don't have a strong opinion on this matter.  s1  
seems pretty cool, since its just for internal nomenclature.

j

> But on that note, s1 is pretty close s3 which is an amazon thing.
>
> Having a longer name than s1 or sf is also fine so then we have:
> s1framework-core
> s1framework-data-emf
> s1framework-otrunk
>
> Or we could just pick some random word like: franconia.  That was the
> place where we had the Nov 2004 retreat, and we started to narrow in  
> on
> what became the core code.  I'm thinking along the lines of
> "dublin-core" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Core
>
> So then we have
> franconia-core
> franconia-data-emf
> franconia-otrunk
>
> Scott
>
> Turadg Aleahmad wrote:
>> 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]
>> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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