4 ms·

I find cute names rapidly exhausting. I loved it at first, but it turns into a meaningless zoo quite often.

imwillofficial 4y ago
Agreed
zitterbewegung 4y ago
Doing a cute name can work for a project that are public but when it is private and you don't have a good way to search for projects or even understanding why you would need the project it really confuses people. Naming versions is worse for Ubuntu because I can't remember what the two letter phrase is. But, a single word I can somewhat remember (macOS uses a single word).
- fallous 4y ago
  Except for Snow Leopard, Mountain Lion, El Capitan, High Sierra, and Big Sur. They do have the benefit of at least referencing a single entity, unlike Ubuntu's naming convention.
  - seba_dos1 4y ago
    Ubuntu repositories are referenced by single word though (trusty, xenial, bionic, focal, impish, jammy, kinetic), you can pretty much ignore the second one and you're still being... precise (12.04).
mumblemumble 4y ago
I think I still prefer them? Projects with descriptive names, given time, will evolve and scope creep until the name becomes more misleading than descriptive. With cute names, at least everyone knows they have to ask.
ldoughty 4y ago
I agree and disagree! :-) I agree that you probably shouldn't have cute names for internal important things ("batman" as an internal server/project name is cute, but doesn't convey much unless you have a "bat" or "cave" or similar product/service/process). That said, at work, we have "Saint Even". This is a cute name for a common problem in our field -- Eventual (Even) consistency. When Saint Even (Pronounced like "Evan") comes to visit, we know we're going to have to either throw up our hands and accept it, or delve into how to fix it. One time, Saint Even blessed us with a 10 second delay. We decided to accept that one because the effort to fix was too large for the delay... However, we should be able to handle a visit from Saint Even for at least 1-2 seconds... It's also easier to say "Saint Even" (when first bringing up the topic, to be clear it's not a person named Evan), and then later "Even" during the discussion, then "Eventual Consistency"... We also get to laugh at the joy this Saint Even fellow brings us as we often need to collaborate to understand where the error happened / did it overwrite data or just stop a process / how can we better handle it in the future (ideally without forcing master-node reads.. e.g. a better detection/retry)
- InCityDreams 4y ago
  >When Saint Even (Pronounced like "Evan") So, if that's how it's pronounced, what does it sound like when a (presumably English speaker) says it?
  - klondike_klive 4y ago
    Steven?
_TwoFinger 4y ago
I remember one of the projects I was part of, in a big company. It was called Voyager, and was about porting the company's software, that was currently running on SunOS/SPARC, to Linux/x86. (As SPARC was about to be EOL'd.) Like Voyager, the space probe, it was about moving away from the Sun (OS) :-)

Agreed

Doing a cute name can work for a project that are public but when it is private and you don't have a good way to search for projects or even understanding why you would need the project it really confuses people. Naming versions is worse for Ubuntu because I can't remember what the two letter phrase is. But, a single word I can somewhat remember (macOS uses a single word).

fallous 4y ago
Except for Snow Leopard, Mountain Lion, El Capitan, High Sierra, and Big Sur. They do have the benefit of at least referencing a single entity, unlike Ubuntu's naming convention.
- seba_dos1 4y ago
  Ubuntu repositories are referenced by single word though (trusty, xenial, bionic, focal, impish, jammy, kinetic), you can pretty much ignore the second one and you're still being... precise (12.04).

mumblemumble 4y ago

I think I still prefer them? Projects with descriptive names, given time, will evolve and scope creep until the name becomes more misleading than descriptive. With cute names, at least everyone knows they have to ask.

ldoughty 4y ago

I agree and disagree! :-) I agree that you probably shouldn't have cute names for internal important things ("batman" as an internal server/project name is cute, but doesn't convey much unless you have a "bat" or "cave" or similar product/service/process). That said, at work, we have "Saint Even". This is a cute name for a common problem in our field -- Eventual (Even) consistency. When Saint Even (Pronounced like "Evan") comes to visit, we know we're going to have to either throw up our hands and accept it, or delve into how to fix it. One time, Saint Even blessed us with a 10 second delay. We decided to accept that one because the effort to fix was too large for the delay... However, we should be able to handle a visit from Saint Even for at least 1-2 seconds... It's also easier to say "Saint Even" (when first bringing up the topic, to be clear it's not a person named Evan), and then later "Even" during the discussion, then "Eventual Consistency"... We also get to laugh at the joy this Saint Even fellow brings us as we often need to collaborate to understand where the error happened / did it overwrite data or just stop a process / how can we better handle it in the future (ideally without forcing master-node reads.. e.g. a better detection/retry)

InCityDreams 4y ago
>When Saint Even (Pronounced like "Evan") So, if that's how it's pronounced, what does it sound like when a (presumably English speaker) says it?
- klondike_klive 4y ago
  Steven?

_TwoFinger 4y ago

I remember one of the projects I was part of, in a big company. It was called Voyager, and was about porting the company's software, that was currently running on SunOS/SPARC, to Linux/x86. (As SPARC was about to be EOL'd.) Like Voyager, the space probe, it was about moving away from the Sun (OS) :-)