> On Oct 14, 2016, at 12:04 PM, Ryan Lovelett <swift-...@ryan.lovelett.me>
>> Whether "pinning" is the right word is a different debate, but when we view
>> pinning as a workflow-focused feature, versus the specification in the
>> manifest (which is the "requirement"), then I think the connotation actually
>> works fairly well (e.g., a pinboard is something you pin to while working,
>> or pinning a dress while you stitch it). I also wasn't a huge fan of pin
>> initially, but as it bounced around in my head for a while I really started
>> to like it, for exactly this connotation reason.
> I think this comment drives at the core of the difference between this
> proposal and what Orta, Alexis and others are saying. (At least for me)
> The description you've provided here, specifically the word "workflow", and
> the concept of operations described by the proprosal are meant to be a
> transient. They are meant as a temporary description of how these
> dependencies should be kept in order. To my mind one "puts a pin" in
> something temporarily. To comeback to it later to do something with it at
> that time. Thus the pin probably does work with this concept.
> Conversely, the concept of "locking" something feels less transient. It feels
> more permanent. More like the concept of operations described by Orta, Alexis
> and others. Idle speculation: might be why those other managers selected the
> word lock.
> Not sure where I come down on the whole thing yet. Just wanted to say that if
> the propsal goes another way than what was first propsed a new word likely
> should be investigated.
I agree with everything here. :)
swift-evolution mailing list