Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

Just a heads up. It seems bpkg is no longer a unique name. http://www.bpkg.io -AK On Jun 15, 2016 1:30 AM, "Seth Hall" wrote: > > > On Jun 6, 2016, at 3:09 PM, Siwek, Jon wrote: > > > > If we switch the design to instead user the super-container format, then

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 6, 2016, at 3:09 PM, Siwek, Jon wrote: > > If we switch the design to instead user the super-container format, then > that’s not an issue for me anymore because the relationship changes from “is > a plugin” to “may have a plugin”. I like the positioning of this

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

On Sun, Jun 05, 2016 at 20:31 +, you wrote: > - New Container > - Script Container (e.g. what is currently called “script package”) > - Compiled Code Container (e.g. what is currently called “plugin”) Yep, and maybe that script container could then even replace all or some of

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

Having reread through the discussion, I want to try to take a step back and review some of it. I believe there are two goals in play: 1) From a user's perspective, the principle of least astonishment. Names matter, and choosing something intuitive or familiar means we're not raising the barrier

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 5, 2016, at 11:51 AM, Slagell, Adam J wrote: > > Regardless, it seems that you and Jon have irreconcilable differences that > eliminate plugin or package. And as the PI and implementer, I give high > weight to both of your opinions. Would either of you object to

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 5, 2016, at 10:55 AM, Robin Sommer wrote: > > So what if we stepped back Yes, generally we may need to step back. I think this thread started based on the idea that the names of things are entirely subjective and separate from the technical design. But that’s not

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 5, 2016, at 10:55 AM, Robin Sommer wrote: > >> To me, the important part of a the definition of a plugin for most >> software is that it is an externally contributed, self/contained >> add-on which extends functionality. > > Agree in principle, but "extending

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

On Sat, Jun 04, 2016 at 20:40 +0200, Jan wrote: > But to me a bundle/package is something different: It's a deployment > unit, acting as some sort of container (usually enriched by metadata). > A plugin/script itself could be used with Bro but wrapping it into the > container allows to manage

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 4, 2016, at 1:40 PM, Jan Grashöfer wrote: > > find a new name for the same thing. But to me a bundle/package is > something different: It's a deployment unit, acting as some sort of > container (usually enriched by metadata). A plugin/script itself could > be

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 4, 2016, at 1:09 PM, Robin Sommer wrote: > > I really don't like calling these things "plugins", nor calling the > whole thing the "plugin manager". I'm with Jan here: I think that > would be quite misleading in terms of what I believe people associate > with "plugin”

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

er, Daniel N Cc: bro-dev@bro.org Subject: Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming > On Jun 3, 2016, at 2:48 PM, Thayer, Daniel N <dntha...@illinois.edu> wrote: > > I like this idea better than anything else I've heard so far, but > one small issue is we would need to be a bit careful to disting

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 4, 2016, at 1:09 PM, Robin Sommer wrote: > > The primary way we've used "plugin" so far is as a compiled, > binary extension. I'm not sure we all have or that the project has used it consistently in that way. It is new enough to Bro I'm not bothered if we shift it

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> Sorry, I was just talking about in terms of interoperability w/ the client: > all metadata is optional and doesn’t magically turn a plugin into something > else that can now work with it. > [...] > - it would create another term for what is already named a “plugin”. Having > two words for

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 4, 2016, at 11:27 AM, Slagell, Adam J wrote: > > I still strongly disagree with ALL metadata being optional, unless it is > automatically cleaned up if they never “finish” putting in required data. Sorry, I was just talking about in terms of interoperability w/

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 4, 2016, at 10:45 AM, Siwek, Jon wrote: > > My last understanding is that we’re starting out w/ metadata being entirely > optional and seeing how it goes. This also makes it more convenient for > people to use the tool to manage plugins they have no intention of

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 4, 2016, at 4:27 AM, Jan Grashöfer wrote: > > From my perspective scripts do not extend Bro. Scripts get executed by > Bro to provide extended functionality. Calling Bro-scripts plugins for > Bro is somehow like calling python-scripts plugins for the python >

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 3, 2016, at 2:48 PM, Thayer, Daniel N wrote: > > I like this idea better than anything else I've heard so far, but > one small issue is we would need to be a bit careful to distinguish between > "Bro plugins" (as seen by running "bro -N"), and > "Bro plugin

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 3, 2016, at 2:39 PM, Slagell, Adam J wrote: > > So what would you do, call it the tool bro-bpm, the project “Bro Plugin > Manager” (BPM), and the objects being managed plugins? Yeah both the tool and the project are "Bro Plugin Manager” (or some variant of BPM

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

>> 3) CBAN becomes something like “Bro Plugin Manager” because it is dealing >> with plugins, not packages. In fact, “plugin" is probably more descriptive >> about what is going on. In general, a plugin just means any form of >> extending a software’s functionality without having to directly

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 3, 2016, at 1:59 PM, Siwek, Jon wrote: > >> >> On Jun 2, 2016, at 3:13 PM, Slagell, Adam J wrote: >> >> It looks like that term is just used here for “Script packages” and on all >> the auto generated subpages. We can just rename that as I

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 2, 2016, at 3:13 PM, Slagell, Adam J wrote: > > It looks like that term is just used here for “Script packages” and on all > the auto generated subpages. We can just rename that as I don’t it is not a > widely used term. I do want to do that before 2.5 if we do

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 2, 2016, at 4:40 PM, Jan Grashöfer wrote: > > The point here was that bro-pkg would align to bro-cut. Although I still > like brow, I would prefer bro-pkg or bropkg to bpkg and bkg. While > b(p)kg could be anything bro-pkg is clearly bro-related. Agreed. And

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

>> I like "bro-pkg," though I wonder whether it could be even shortened to >> "bpkg" or "bkg." > > It could be, and bpkg is what I original suggest, but I thought you and > Justin liked bro-org better. The point here was that bro-pkg would align to bro-cut. Although I still like brow, I would

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 2, 2016, at 3:37 PM, Matthias Vallentin wrote: > >> So with that said, I propose bro-pkg, but will leave this open for >> another day if there are strong opinions. > > I like "bro-pkg," though I wonder whether it could be even shortened to > "bpkg" or "bkg." It

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> So with that said, I propose bro-pkg, but will leave this open for > another day if there are strong opinions. I like "bro-pkg," though I wonder whether it could be even shortened to "bpkg" or "bkg." This would be the name for the command line client. How would we call the whole thing? The Bro

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 2, 2016, at 10:56 AM, Siwek, Jon wrote: > >> >> On Jun 1, 2016, at 5:30 PM, Slagell, Adam J wrote: >> >> These are variants of #1, which I now substitute with bro-pkg > > Related to “pkg” or “package” naming: if that terminology gets used,

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 2, 2016, at 10:56 AM, Siwek, Jon wrote: > > Related to “pkg” or “package” naming: if that terminology gets used, what > would be done about the classic/existing usage of the term “package” within > Bro? > > “Package” is currently used to refer to any collection

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 1, 2016, at 5:30 PM, Slagell, Adam J wrote: > > These are variants of #1, which I now substitute with bro-pkg Related to “pkg” or “package” naming: if that terminology gets used, what would be done about the classic/existing usage of the term “package” within

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On Jun 1, 2016, at 5:58 PM, Slagell, Adam J wrote: > > I have gone over a bunch of these threads and want to bring this back towards > consensus, or at least consilience. Let’s pick from the following 5 options, > and then we can decide if these are bundles, ports,

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

I have gone over a bunch of these threads and want to bring this back towards consensus, or at least consilience. Let’s pick from the following 5 options, and then we can decide if these are bundles, ports, packages, plugins, extensions, modules, or bags. Key criteria are clarity and

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> I like all these suggestions from Adam - and as a person who enjoys making > electronic music would humbly add 'bpm' (Bro Package Manager) to the list > ;-) We had a good discussion in the Bro Gitter channel about this yesterday. In fact, I suggested "bpm," but as it turns out, there exists

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On May 31, 2016, at 12:54 PM, Matthias Vallentin wrote: > >> >> I favor “bagger” or “bagboy” along with “bags”. > > I did not get the "bagger" and "bagboy" variations until I googled it, > probably because I'm not a native speaker. However, I like the grocery > bag

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

I like the bagging theme, too. As one more thought, maybe the client could just be "bag" as well? It's a verb too. :) On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:54 -0700, you wrote: > > - boxer, boxes (sort of already taken by Broala's BroBox) > > - bundler, bundles (though seems like Ruby has taken

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> - boxer, boxes (sort of already taken by Broala's BroBox) > - bundler, bundles (though seems like Ruby has taken this name) > - bagger/bagboy, bags (also has the association w/ eye bags) > - tempest, drops (eye of the storm, rain drops, eye drops... the tears of > those trapped

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On May 30, 2016, at 9:44 PM, Matthias Vallentin wrote: > > I don't know :-). We need a command line client and a project name. When > they are the same, it's certainly easier to remember. Yes, I think the client and project name should be the same. From the other

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> By the way: Are we talking about renaming the whole project? I don't know :-). We need a command line client and a project name. When they are the same, it's certainly easier to remember. My favorite name so far is also "brow." The eye brow of the Bro logo makes for a nice association. It

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> Besides naming and skipping ahead to implementation, I highly recommend > looking at how Rust manages crates. They are a pleasure to use and work > with. Rust's cargo [1] is indeed well thought through (I like the dependency specification especially [2]) and we should look at it in depth during

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> Think the current name is fine, but if you change it I think it helps if it > relates to things people know. So names like bpkg, bro-ports, or bro-brew > would give the immediate analogy through the name. True. That's why I somehow like brow. It relates to the logo and is memorable but could

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

Think the current name is fine, but if you change it I think it helps if it relates to things people know. So names like bpkg, bro-ports, or bro-brew would give the immediate analogy through the name. > On May 27, 2016, at 12:00 PM, Matthias Vallentin wrote: > > To find

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

Besides naming and skipping ahead to implementation, I highly recommend looking at how Rust manages crates. They are a pleasure to use and work with. -AK On May 27, 2016 5:38 PM, "anthony kasza" wrote: > Oh man. I don't know. Call it the colossal. > > -AK > On May 27,

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

Oh man. I don't know. Call it the colossal. -AK On May 27, 2016 5:24 PM, "Matthias Vallentin" wrote: > > I like how Spicy was named, by choosing something completely different > and > > unrelated to the "bro" theme. > > I like that too. Do you have a suggestion? > >

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> I like how Spicy was named, by choosing something completely different and > unrelated to the "bro" theme. I like that too. Do you have a suggestion? Matthias ___ bro-dev mailing list bro-dev@bro.org

Re: [Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

> On May 27, 2016, at 1:00 PM, Matthias Vallentin wrote: > > To find the new name for our CBAN project, it probably make sense to > brainstorm separately from the existing technical thread. I'd say let's > collect some candidates and then create survey to vote on them. > >

[Bro-Dev] CBAN naming

To find the new name for our CBAN project, it probably make sense to brainstorm separately from the existing technical thread. I'd say let's collect some candidates and then create survey to vote on them. Here are some ideas from the existing thread: - brow - broil - broom - bpk