On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer < gustavo.nieme...@canonical.com> wrote:
> > Okay, change in direction: I've discussed this with the team, and the > response was 100% positive on the term inversion, so we'll go ahead and do > it. > > We've also managed to hold snapcraft in time, so no further > incompatibility damage will be made. > > Wow, that's great to hear! :) > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer < > gustavo.nieme...@canonical.com> wrote: > >> Hi Andrea, >> >> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Andrea Bernabei < >> andrea.berna...@canonical.com> wrote: >>> >>> I can't help thinking of a slot as a way to provide something, and if >>> you want to use that something you "plug" your snap into it. >>> Mainly because of the mental image I have of the "plugging" action, I >>> think: there is a slot that sits there in the system, if you want some >>> functionality you "plug" your snap in it... >>> Does that make sense? Am I missing something? :) >>> >> >> We haven't questioned this much because the previous terms we used >> already had slots on that end (the other side wasn't a physical analogy). >> So when we decided to use plug it was already clear which one that was. >> >> Even then, which way is "right" on the physical world depends on what we >> have at hand. If you're thinking about energy, for example, low voltage >> devices pretty much always have the plug as the powered side. If you have a >> USB device at hand, then...? >> >> At the same time, I wouldn't mind having inverted the terms before, but >> now it feels slightly too late to do that once again. >> >> >> gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net >> > > > > -- > gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net >
-- snappy-devel mailing list snappy-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snappy-devel
