12 Jun
2017
12 Jun
'17
7:31 p.m.
Question that I think should be answered first : what is the audience and
the objectives ?
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Guillaume Delhumeau <
guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
+0 for "Standard" (the definition is
accurate but it definitively miss some
sex-appeal)
-1 for "Default" which is the opposite of sex-appeal.
Vanilla might be a problem for users, but at least it was a cool name :)
2017-06-12 13:18 GMT+02:00 Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>et>:
with
getting
strong
“XWiki
since
way
generic
Flavor”
which
platform
flavor.
name.
--
Guillaume Delhumeau (guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com)
Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS
Committer on the XWiki.org project
On 12 Jun 2017, at 12:42, Eduard Moraru
<enygma2002(a)gmail.com> wrote:
"XWiki Vanilla", because it`s the *standard flavor* :D Sounds so funny
that
> I kind of like it :)
>
> However, I`m not so sure about non-techinical users or how that goes > other stuff that we already or might
produce, since we don`t really
have
a
prefer
pattern on that. Fun proposal, though.
My POV:
* The wikipedia page on “Vanilla” shows that the name is perfect from a
technical POV. It really represents what we want.
* I think most of our users are non-tech and wouldn’t understand it since
I don’t think the “Vanilla” terminology is that common outside of tech
circles
So I agree that it’s a fun proposal but we’ll get users asking us
frequently why we chose an ice-cream flavor for an XWiki flavor ;)
Thus I’m also hesitating but I think I’m more -0 since “XWiki Vanilla"
sounds more like a code name than a real name. I think that I still “Standard” or “Default” ATM (with a small
preference for “Standard” which
has a bit more meaning than “Default” for me). Now if everyone else
prefers
“Vanilla”, I wouldn’t oppose it, as I also find
it fun and to the point.
Thanks
-Vincent
> Thanks,
> Eduard
>
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Marta Girdea <marta.girdea(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm jumping in a bit late, but I was just wondering if anyone
considered
>
"Vanilla" [1]. It was the absolute first thing that popped to my mind
when
>> I saw the discussion about naming the standard flavour.
>>
>> Just my 2 cents,
>> Marta
>>
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanilla_software
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Denis and all,
>>>
>>>> On 10 Jun 2017, at 11:46, Denis Gervalle <dgl(a)softec.lu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>> Sorry to jump in after an already long discussion since we are >>
close to a conclusion, so I just don’t want my intervention to cause
more
>>> fuzz than good.
>>>> I am in accordance with most of what was said so far, but “Default”
>>> looks to me a less valuable naming than “Standard”, it is not a >>> opinion, so I give my +1 to
“Standard” and +0 to “Default”. I will
use
>>> “Standard" in the following,
just to be clearer, but you can
substitute
> it
>> with “Default” if you wish (you might notice further subtle
differences,
>> or
>>> not).
>>>> So, what I am not sure about now is why all proposals end with >>> flavor” (and this is not really
about the American spelling of
flavour
!
to
>> :D). All flavours we gonna have surely
will be XWiki ones, won’t it ?
So
>> if
>>> we start with the “Standard XWiki Flavor”, I am afraid we are going > lead
>> a movement where everyone will name their flavour with that same
suffix.
>> Is
>>> that our intention ?
>>>> “XWiki Standard Flavor” would already carry a different meaning, >>
it would say more “Standard flavour made by the XWiki team”. However,
if
>>> our intent was more to say this is a generic wiki flavour, using
>> “Standard
>>> Wiki Flavor” looks more in line with our intended meaning. And if our
>>> meaning is more that this is just a generic flavour, ending with
>> “Standard
>>> Flavor” is probably simpler, clearer and better.
>>>> WDYT ?
>>>
>>> I agree with you.
>>>
>>> I think we have 2 choices for the name that appears in the DW UI:
>>> * “Standard”. We may not even need the “Flavor” suffix in the same as
one
>> we don’t add an “Extension” suffix in the
EM UI. IMO the DW UI for
> flavors
>> should indicate the author in the UI, something like ”Standard” and
then
>>> “developed by XWiki Development Team” or “developed by XWiki SAS” or
>>> “developed by Denis Gervalle”.
>>> * "XWiki Standard” or “XWiki Standard Flavor” to indicate it’s the
>>> made by the XWiki open source dev
team. So that could be the full
name
>> but
>>> the name we display in the DW UI could simply be “Standard Flavor”
and
> then
>> “developed by XWiki Development Team”, etc.
>>
>> If we want to use the term “Wiki” then it could come as a replacement
for
>> the “Standard” term, to mention that it’s
a generic wiki flavor, as
> opposed
>> to an intranet flavor, a knowledge base flavor, etc. But I agree that
> “Wiki
>> Flavor” is a good contender (and one that Ludovic mentioned too, he
even
>> mentioned Structured Wiki Flavor). I’d be
+0 on “Wiki Flavor”.
“Standard
>>> Wiki Flavor” is also possible and hints that there can be other >>
Wiki flavors that are not standard. So I’m also +0 for it.
>>
>> Now outside of the DW UI, the full name of the flavors done by the
XWiki
>>> Dev Team could be prefixed with XWiki as in “the XWiki Standard >> (or
>>> “XWiki Demo Flavor”). Other companies or individuals would name is
with
>>> their identity, such as “the <my
company> Procedure Flavor”.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -Vincent
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Denis Gervalle
>>>> SOFTEC sa - CEO
>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 16:48, Thomas Mortagne <
>> thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> So here is the current situation
>>>>
>>>> = Proposition which don't annoy people enough to get a veto
>>>>
>>>> * "Default XWiki Flavor" (+3)
>>>> * "Standard XWiki Flavor" (+2)
>>>>
>>>> = Someone gave a veto on those
>>>>
>>>> * "Base XWiki Flavor"
>>>> * "Classic XWiki Flavor" (good success for this one until it
hits
Edy
>>> and Vincent)
>>> * "Raw XWiki Flavor"
>>> * "Starter XWiki Flavor"
>>> * "XWiki Flavor”
>>> * "Generic XWiki Flavor"
>>>
>>> Anyone want to change his votes ?
>>>
>>> I don't really have a preference between "Default" and
"Standard".
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
>> wrote:
>>>> So I’ve read this thread and here’s my POV:
>>>>
>>>> * "Base XWiki Flavor” -1 (same reason as Thomas)
>>>> * “Classic XWiki Flavor” -1 (same reason as Edy, it means there’s a
> non
>> classic and *better* one and we don’t have one so it doesn’t make
sense)
>>>> * “Raw XWiki Flavor” -1 (not
enough meaning IMO and a bit
deprecatory)
>>>>> * “Starter XWiki Flavor” -1 (would mean there’s another flavor
>>> isn’t the case)
>>>>> * "Default XWiki Flavor” +1
>>>>> * "Generic XWiki Flavor” +1
>>>>> * “Standard XWiki Flavor” +1 (makes the most sense IMO)
>>>>> * "XWiki Flavor”. Here it’s hard to understand that “XWiki”
actually
>>> means “developed by the XWiki
project” and it would work only if
other
>>> flavors don’t have “XWiki” in the
name. This is why I’m -1 ATM for
it.
>> IMO
>>> it’s not easy enough to differentiate and understand what it means
>> compared
>>> to other listed flavors such “Procedure Flavor” from XWiki SAS or
“Demo
>>
Flavor” from contrib.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
>>>>
>>>>> On 24 May 2017, at 11:51, Thomas Mortagne <
thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm getting closer to finish with the hard work around new
>>>>> flavor which is going to replace XE.
>>>>>
>>>>> Need to decide what user will see in the Flavor picker when
installed
>>> XWiki now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a reminder we decided that this would be a generic flavor,
not
>> tied
>>>>>> to any specific use case (so forget about "Knwonledge Base
Flavor"
>>>>>> :)).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here is a few ideas gathered in previous mails:
>>>>>> * "XWiki Flavor"
>>>>>> * "Default XWiki Flavor"
>>>>>> * "Generic XWiki Flavor"
>>>>>> * "Base XWiki Flavor"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Generic" is probably a way too technical term.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Base" would be misleading IMO since it's not
really a base >>>>>> Its primary goal is not
to be used as a dependency (of course it's
>>>>>> fine to have it as dependency if you just want to add pre
installed
>>>>>> extensions to the
default flavor). It's a -1 for me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Frankly I would simply go for "XWiki Flavor". I know,
it's not
going
>>>>> to be the only flavor for XWiki but it's obvious when you
actually
> see
>>>>> severals of those in the picker anyway and I find it nicer than
>>>>> "Default XWiki Flavor" which basically means the same thing
since
the
>>>>>> XWiki core project does not plan to provide any other flavor.
I'm
>> also
>>>>>> fine with "Default XWiki Favor" if others think
it's a better
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT ?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Thomas Mortagne
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thomas Mortagne
>>
>>
>