royale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl>
Subject [DISCUSS] project vs. project name
Date Mon, 02 Oct 2017 09:25:28 GMT
Hi,

With the renaming effort planned to start right after the 'packaging'
branch lands, I think it makes sense to discuss and vote on the naming of
the product(s) of this project.

Buried in another thread Alex remarked the following, which I think is an
excellent suggestion:

"When we were discussing this earlier, we were discussing two
IDE-friendly release
artifacts, one designed for folks migrating from Apache Flex and another
for folks not interested in SWF.  In the packaging branch I have most of
that working.

We were discussing calling the migration package 'FlexJS' and the other one
Royale or RoyaleJS.  The latter is considered by some folks to mean "Royale
for JS".  The package names would be apache-royale-flexjs-<version> and
maybe apache-royale-royalejs-<version>. The project name would definitely
be Royale but I think we want to have artifacts that denote target markets."

A strong case has been made to leave off the "JS" off all but the
legacy/migration package, which makes sense to me as well.

I think there are plans to have this project create multiple product (e.g.
one that does AS3->WebAssembly), so I do not think that we should name the
current product 'Royale'. It will be increasingly confusing to have a
product with the same name as the project and then have other products from
the same project with totally different names. I suggest we come up with a
naming convention that will reflect the functionality of the various
products and their link to the project. E.g. (off the top of my head, just
to show what I mean): royale-as-js, royale-as-wasm, etc.

What do you think?

EdB



-- 
Ix Multimedia Software

Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht

T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message