This reminds me (from a long time ago) of seeing IT department stick names of jungle animals on computers so they can be recognized on the network. These days,

This reminds me (from a long time ago) of seeing IT department stick names of jungle animals on computers so they can be recognized on the network. These days, there are many cases where _instances_ of something are given random "cute" names. A particular server will have a suitable-for-work but fun name slapped on, like "grumpy goat". Hover, I can't imagine _classes_ of something following that kind of naming convention. This post seems to be more about _queue_ names or _service_ names. Software DOES intentionally use cute and random names for big-ticket items (see "git"). It would be confusing to apply this practice to more minor software, because it would be too many to remember. If I have a service as a part of an app that consumes data from a redis queue and sends it to a log collector, a fully descriptive name is distasteful, but I wouldn't want to name it "anteater" because even if my mental picture is vivid, other people will... not get it. I'd call it "log-passer" or something.