My preference would be that the committers develop a naming philosophy and that the philosophy would: (1) ban cute or geeky names, (2) give names semantically associated, in English, with function, (3) give a procedure for naming.
Just a thought. People unfairly or otherwise have their code value judged in their naming; "HI" for "hidden information", I think, will be okay, but "Diary" would color the code by casting doubt on the maturity of the coders. I didn't say it was fair or just. Sent from my iPhone Michael McGrady Principal investigator AF081_028 SBIR Chief Architect Topia Technology, Inc Work 1.253.572.9712 Cel 1.253.720.3365 On Jan 30, 2011, at 1:27 AM, Dan Creswell <[email protected]> wrote: > I think the name we choose is probably related to the other discussion about > how we handle specifications....At least part of the kit's responsibility is > to ensure compatibility with the specs IMHO. > > On that basis I'd be calling it Jini Compatibility Kit but, well, it's only > a name and so long as it's clear what the kit itself is for/does it don't > matter soooo much. > > > On 30 January 2011 02:32, Peter Firmstone <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We had a number of suggestions for the Jini TCK subproject, thanks to all >> who put forward suggestions and participated: >> >> * Jini Compatibility Kit >> * Chastise >> * >> >> River Compatibility Kit or RiCK >> >> * Torturer >> * River Delta >> * River TCK >> >> I propose that we assign the project name: >> >> "Rick" - River's Compatibility Kit. >> >> and describe it as: >> >> A test kit to ensure compatibility and compliance of services, proxy's and >> clients with the Jini TM specifications: >> >> Jini TM lookup service specification v1.1 >> Jini TM discovery and join specification v3.0 >> >> Regards, >> >> Peter. >> >> >> >>
