Whoever works with Hadoop tech would find names like:
Hadoop
Spark
Cassandra
HBase
Accumulo
Hive
Pig
Impala
Oozie
YARN
Kafka
Flume
Sqoop
...
Go datascience and you'll get:
R
Shiny
Jupyter
Pandas
Bokeh
D3
And in JS:
Node
Angular
Express
descriptive names? Not at all.
What matters is not the name, it is its description.
And, know what, put a generic name and it will be ungooglable.
Try with Visual Studio Code ...
Pfah, descriptive project names... As if these were descriptive:
Ubuntu 15.10 (Wily Werewolf)
Ubuntu 15.04 (Vivid Vervet)
Ubuntu 14.04.3 LTS (Trusty Tahr)
Ubuntu 12.04.5 LTS (Precise Pangolin)
Oh yeah super descriptive names:
Oracle Communications Diameter Signaling Router
Have a clue? Enjoy, they have a bunch and renamed a few:
https://www.oracle.com/products/oracle-a-z.html
Want to know? Pay the dues.
Phil
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Robert Withers
<robert.w.with...@gmail.com <mailto:robert.w.with...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I would need to disagree with you as inquiry is possible by
description, rather than by name, through conversation with those
who don't have to inquire, due to their knowledge [see Meno's
Paradox...]. So, a third possibility exists through communal
association. Do you know Kevin Bacon? ;-)
I've used that language!
On 12/08/2015 04:02 PM, EuanM wrote:
The philosophical issue behind the disutility of project names
like
these is "Meno's Paradox"
On 8 December 2015 at 21:01, EuanM <euan...@gmail.com
<mailto:euan...@gmail.com>> wrote:
"I wish people would choose descriptive names for their
projects" - Todd
I agree.
I went looking for the current state of dbxtalk recently.
It seemed
to ba apackage designed for my needs - to X[-over] from a
DB to
[small]talk.
I went there and the the page started talking about
"Glorp" and
"Garage". Neither are mnemonic or meaningful
These projects are just the tip of the iceberg.
Pharo project names have publisher-only project names. The
project
name equivalent of write-only computer languages, like
Brain-F**k.
On 7 December 2015 at 17:52, Todd Blanchard
<tblanch...@mac.com <mailto:tblanch...@mac.com>> wrote:
Sigh.
I wish people would choose descriptive names for their
projects. I went looking on Smalltalkhub for some
capability and what I found are thousands of packages
with names that mean nothing and no description
entered either. If you want to make sure nobody ever
uses your code you've just taken a giant step in the
right direction. But if you hope to make something
lots of people benefit from - nobody is going to look
for "mushroom" when they want crypto capabilities.
Sorry, this has been really bugging me lately. We, as
a community, do a lousy job of making our code easy to
find.
-Todd Blanchard
On Dec 7, 2015, at 07:38, Ben Coman
<b...@openinworld.com> wrote:
I like it, but it seems you missed my point :)
mushroom --> 117,000,000 is two orders of
magnitude more hidden.
Anyway, maybe I overplay its significance.
cheers -ben
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:11 PM, Robert Withers
<robert.w.with...@gmail.com
<mailto:robert.w.with...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I renamed the project to Mushroom and I also
dumped the encoding work to
focus on shutdown, optimization and
serialization. Here's the wiki:
https://github.com/SqueakCryptographySquad/Mushroom/wiki
thanks,Robert
On 12/06/2015 01:42 AM, Ben Coman wrote:
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Robert
Withers
<robert.w.with...@gmail.com
<mailto:robert.w.with...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 12/05/2015 09:24 PM, Ben Coman wrote:
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:57 PM,
Robert Withers
<robert.w.with...@gmail.com
<mailto:robert.w.with...@gmail.com>>
wrote:
Now I think you are right on
with your observation.
Additionally, the
number
of dialects could increase
further with Fuel
serialization, just port
SecureSession and bits.
Alright, I came up with a name
and it may border on the
egregious ...
presenting ...
"Maelstrom"
Great sounding name. However some
general advice for the community,
since I see a lot of great
sounding project names drowned out
in the
noise of our web-search-centric
universe. A litmus test for project
naming is using google search to
find which return low search results.
Today, its more important to be
unique than any other attribute of a
name. So in general, *dictionary*
english words are not the best.
One technique is to intentionally
mispell the word you like. Here are
some comparative examples (note,
the surrounding quotes are required
to avoid google trying to be
helpful and correct the spelling)...
"maelstrom" --> 7,480,000
"maelstroom" --> 6,200
"maelstrum" --> 2,280
"maelstruum" --> 7
Lots of interesting other
techniques can be found by
searching on:
techniques to generate brand names
or domain names.
cheers -ben
I would be happy to change the names
to something more unique, though it
may
take a few. Are you suggesting
"maelstruum"?
cheers,
Robert
*Suggesting* yes, but the choice is yours
;) You need to own it.
I think maelstruum is certainly memorable
with the double "u", but
maybe jarring next the the "m". I'm
inclined to maelstroom, since I
associate it with "zoom". I wouldn't
necessarily go for the absolute
lowest results. I have an entirely
unsubstantiated belief that
anything less than 10,000 gives a
reasonable chance to compete once a
user's browsing history is taken into
account. Finally you need to
check existing results don't return
something abhorrent (I didn't do
this).
I'd encourage to play around testing on
google search. Its quick and
easy to generate and test alternatives.
I've added a few more below.
"maelstra" --> 3,560
"maelstram" --> 504
"maelstrim" --> 1200
"maelstroon" --> 58
"maelstroomi" --> 4
btw, I wouldn't swap the order of the "ae"
since that would be
susceptible to real typing errors.
cheers -ben
