It seems these cutesy type names are more representations of proprietary code than open source modules. The name becomes opaque to its internals. I noticed wh

It seems these cutesy type names are more representations of proprietary code than open source modules. The name becomes opaque to its internals. I noticed when I switched form MS Windows to Linux, there was a marked difference in the names of tools and modules. So, you could get a better high-level understanding for how it works. With Windows, the solution was more than likely strictly prescriptive. But with an open source design, it becomes much easier to grok the whole setup. Not sure if this is entirely do to naming conventions. It might also have to do with the online communities.