/GVFS

GVfs name is already taken #7

Closed
sam0x17 opened this Issue Feb 3, 2017 · 48 comments

Comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
@sam0x17

sam0x17 commented Feb 3, 2017

The GNOME Virtual File System (GVfs) is already a well established thing and is in Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GVfs. It would be polite to consider a different name for Microsoft GVFS.
@sanoursa
Contributor

sanoursa commented Feb 3, 2017

Our product is the "Git Virtual File System". I'm sure we'll take a hard look at the coincidence of the acronyms matching.
@coldacid

coldacid commented Feb 4, 2017

Just throwing it out there but perhaps GitVFS is enough to make everyone happy?
@y2kbugger

y2kbugger commented Feb 4, 2017

Not only polite, but beneficial due to reduced confusion.
@sanoursa
Contributor

sanoursa commented Feb 4, 2017

It's a very fair point, and something we're considering.
@Tsutsukakushi

Tsutsukakushi commented Feb 4, 2017 •
Edited 1 time

Our product is the "Git Virtual File System".

There repo is named "GVFS", every announcement also callsit "GVFS", the title in the README says "GVFS" and so does everything else in it.

GVFS stands for Git Virtual File System

This sentence from the README only says what it GVFS stands for but all the evidence points out to "GVFS" being the product name and not "Git Virtual File System"

I'm sure we'll take a hard look at the coincidence of the acronyms matching.

Yeah, but what a coinceidence that one of them also ends in "Virtual File System", right? It's not like it only takes 2 seconds to google the name and find out that it's already taken by another project in the same area.

Here is my new operating system, it's called DOS which stands for "Desktop Operating System"
@flyingfeather1501

flyingfeather1501 commented Feb 4, 2017

GitVFS is probably the least confusion option here. After all, gvfs and GnomeVFS are also different..
@WhyNotHugo

WhyNotHugo commented Feb 5, 2017

The name clash is actually worsened by the fact that they're both Virtual File Systems. If both products were completely different things (eg: a photo editor and a fridge) that'd be okay, but the chance of confusion it too high, considering how close both tools' functionality is.
@Tsutsukakushi

Tsutsukakushi commented Feb 5, 2017 •
Edited 1 time

@hobarrera which is even more worsened by the fact that it only takes few seconds to check. It's like Swift and Swift.

Swift is 8 years older than Swift. Gvfs git logs go back to 2007. I wouldn't put it past Micro$oft and Apple to deliberately pick these names even though they clash with competing projects.
@szeder

szeder commented Feb 5, 2017

"Git" is a trademark, so a name like GitVFS seems to be problematic, but so does Git Virtual File System.

https://git-scm.com/trademark
http://public-inbox.org/git/20170202022655.2jwvudhvo4hmueaw@sigill.intra.peff.net/T/#u
@seanscottking

seanscottking commented Feb 5, 2017

msgvfs (TM)
@norpol

norpol commented Feb 5, 2017

How about calling it 'Remote Git File System' RGFS? This would actually describe what this does a little better and short google and github search didn't reveal collisions to other projects for me. (GRFS does).
@Jamesits

Jamesits commented Feb 6, 2017

Years ago you called it "Smart Files" on SkyDrive on Windows 8.1. Still a good name to consider.

@ad-m ad-m referenced this issue Feb 6, 2017

Closed

GVFS collision name #15

@morsik

morsik commented Feb 6, 2017 •
Edited 1 time

which is even more worsened by the fact that it only takes few seconds to check. It's like Swift and Swift.

@Tsutsukakushi: there is also OpenStack Swift ;)
@mattbishop

mattbishop commented Feb 7, 2017

Given #4 I don't think this will actually be a problem in the wild.
@Rutix

Rutix commented Feb 7, 2017

@Tsutsukakushi you give some good arguments but your use of Micro$oft kinda undermines your reasons. Using that term comes over as very childish and immature. We're all adults here, right? Can we have professional discussions without acting like that.
@sam0x17

sam0x17 commented Feb 7, 2017

Since it exists mainly for the purpose of making a ~270 GB repository manageable, I put forward MonolithFS 😄
@McoreD

McoreD commented Feb 7, 2017

I don't think the GNOME Virtual File System (GVfs) is copyrighted. Alos, this is called GVFS.
@mcatanzaro

mcatanzaro commented Feb 7, 2017 •
Edited 2 times

That is not correct. GVfs is not designated to the public domain and may only be used in compliance with its copyright license (LPGLv2+). But that does not seem at all relevant to this issue.

There is significant potential for confusion due to this naming and it would seem to be beneficial to both parties to avoid that. The vast majority of Linux desktops (anything not KDE-based) have many gvfs processes constantly running in the background; on my machine, I count gvfs-afc-volume-monitor, gvfsd, gvfsd-fus, gvfsd-http, gvfsd-metadata, gvfsd-trash, gvfs-goa-volume-monitor, gvfs-gphoto2-volume-monitor, gvfs-mtp-volume-monitor, gvfs-udisks2-volume-monitor. Having an unrelated project whose name differs only in capitalization is going to be a confusing mess. It will also make searching for GVFS very problematic; a quick web search for GVFS shows about half the results currently refer to Microsoft's GVFS, and half to GNOME's GVfs. It also means users searching for GVFS on e.g. Wikipedia will be directed to information about GNOME and away from information about Microsoft's product.
@sanoursa
Contributor

sanoursa commented Feb 7, 2017

@mcatanzaro I have already been in touch with Ondrej Holy on the Gnome GVFS project, and thank you for reaching out as well. This was an unfortunate naming coincidence - "VFS" is a very generic term, and we got unlucky that our G collided with yours - and we definitely intend to address it.

I don't have an immediate answer but we are working on it. We don't want to make a knee-jerk name change, only to have to change it again later. So what I will say for now is that we are very aware of the need to change, and we will not release on Linux under this name. For now, this is effectively a preview and not a released product, so I ask for some patience as we determine the best name to use.
@mcatanzaro

mcatanzaro commented Feb 8, 2017

Sounds good, thanks @sanoursa!
@Tsutsukakushi

Tsutsukakushi commented Feb 8, 2017

@mcatanzaro

Having an unrelated project whose name differs only in capitalization

In many cases they don't differ in that either, for example in package managers the package names aren't usually capitalized.
@illwieckz

illwieckz commented Feb 13, 2017

@mcatanzaro: on my machine, I count gvfs-afc-volume-monitor, gvfsd, gvfsd-fus, gvfsd-http, gvfsd-metadata, gvfsd-trash, gvfs-goa-volume-monitor, gvfs-gphoto2-volume-monitor, gvfs-mtp-volume-monitor, gvfs-udisks2-volume-monitor.

Let's welcome gvfs-gvfs-volume-monitor ! 😁

@norpol: How about calling it 'Remote Git File System' RGFS?

I find this name far far better than "Git Virtual File System", even without name collision, because the purpose of this Git VFS is to allow working on Git repositories connected to a remote one.

We can imagine some other Git Virtual File System with other purpose, for example we can imagine a “Dedupe Git File System” that adds underlying support for rolling checksum deduplication to standard git repositories to help big binary files management without git modification.

So, today the name is already colliding with GNOME's gvfs project on the VFS part, but tomorrow it can also collide with other Git VFS projects with other purpose, colliding on both Git and VFS.
@SamuelEnglard

SamuelEnglard commented Feb 13, 2017

I'd like to vote for Central Git File System CGFS 😂
@eMPee584

eMPee584 commented Feb 13, 2017

@sam0x17

sam0x17 commented Feb 13, 2017 •
Edited 1 time

a few gems...
legit (pronounced french le, git)
gitlit or litgit -- "like git, but lit" ... will be popular with the kids these days
biggit / BigGit -- "work effectively with big repos by subjecting your git file transfers to extreme vetting. Make git great again, bigly."
@sanoursa
Contributor

sanoursa commented Feb 15, 2017

I appreciate all the creative ideas :-). Closing this issue for now until we have something more to announce on the topic.

@sanoursa sanoursa closed this Feb 15, 2017

This was referenced Feb 22, 2017

Closed
Closed
Closed
@Korporal

Korporal commented Jun 29, 2017

Drop the "virtual" it serves no purpose and only muddies the waters. GFS is sufficient and appropriate. The "virtual" is pointless (all levels of driver layers virtualize something NTFS isn't called NTVFS after all).
@morsik

morsik commented Jun 30, 2017

@Korporal: GFS is already taken since… uh… 2005. It's "Global File System" developed by RedHat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GFS2
@Korporal

Korporal commented Jun 30, 2017

OK, that blows that. Perhaps one way to arrive at a name/acronym is to revisit what it does and review the terms used to describe or explain what it does.

These terms spring to mind "Git optimized file system", "Git on-demand file system", "Git minimized file service", "lazy load git file system" etc. Maybe something can be put together by this kind of process..
@Tsutsukakushi

Tsutsukakushi commented Jul 3, 2017

@sanoursa Still nothing?
@dotMorten

dotMorten commented Nov 15, 2017

I don't get this. The product name is different. There's millions of examples that different product names converted to an acronym matches other product names' acronyms. Even on Wikipedia when looking up acronyms you often get a long list of possible pages that the acronym refer too.

It's basically impossible these days to come up with a product name who's acronym doesn't match another products acronym. That's really only an issue if it's marketed only as the acronym and it's a registered trademark.
@sam0x17

sam0x17 commented Nov 16, 2017 •
Edited 1 time

Maybe stop using 4 letter names? There are only 1679616 of them...
@illwieckz

illwieckz commented Nov 16, 2017

I don't get this. The product name is different.

I don't know how you manage to find a difference between the two names in:

except capitalisation (and they are both acronyms).

That's really only an issue if it's marketed only as the acronym and it's a registered trademark.

So you are just saying there is no place for kindness in this world and what only matters is to make lawsuits?

By the way it's not a problem of kindness, using that GVFS name is not good for Microsoft at first because not only there is already a well known technology using that name so it leads people to confusion, but that other technology is also an IT one, and worst of that that other technology is a virtual file system technology too. Between the twos, only the meaning of G in GVFS differs ! It's hard to make a worst collision and that's not good for Microsoft own product recognition.

Just for fun, how would you name the gvfs implementation of gvfs (to mount a Git VFS using GNOME VFS facilities)? gvfs-gvfs? Even GitVFS was a name easy to find.

Yeah, with only 4 chars so many collisions can happen, but no one said a project must only be named with 4 chars, no more. Also, even if it's easy to make a naming collision, it's not less easy than googling (or _bing_ing) the name candidates to see if it's a good idea or not…
@mmjconolly

mmjconolly commented Nov 17, 2017

Please change the name. It's simply unnecessary confusion.
@perryprog

perryprog commented Nov 17, 2017 •
Edited 1 time

@sam0x17 if my math is right, I think there's 4722366482869645213696 1679616 different four letter names (including numbers)

4^(26+10)
(26+10)^4
@clhuang

clhuang commented Nov 17, 2017

@perryprog it's actually 36^4=1679616, still far bigger than 10k.
@perryprog

perryprog commented Nov 17, 2017

@clhuang Ah, ok. That Makes more sense.
@powellc

powellc commented Nov 18, 2017 •
Edited 3 times

It's been months. The longer you go without figuring out a new name, the harder it will be to switch. At this point it almost appears as if you've taken the "ignore it and eventually GVfs will lose relevance and our project will be the default for GVFS." But that's being a terrible OSS neighbor and has karmic (or community) repercussions. Just figure out a new name. It's not hard. I personally think RGFS works really well as, Remote Git File System, as it doesn't cloud the waters with the "virtual" nonsense.

Of course you could also use, GNGVFS. GNGVFS is Not Gnome Virtual File System
@norpol

norpol commented Nov 18, 2017

Yes, I'm also for RGFS - I've tried to write a script that would replace all strings (with whatever name) in the project and do proper renaming of the according files (beware, there might be multiple casings e.g. GVFS gvfs Gvfs and so on).
Is there someone who could help out / volunteer submitting a PR + is willing to signup at Microsoft 'Contribution License Agreement'.

Thank you.
@sam0x17

sam0x17 commented Nov 18, 2017

oh yeah lol forgot alpha characters XD

illwieckz added a commit to illwieckz/GVFS that referenced this issue Nov 18, 2017

@illwieckz
rename GVFS to RGFS, fix #7 
This is a renaming example based on suggestion found there:
Microsoft#7 (comment)

This was done doing:

```sh
git ls-files | xargs -n1 -P1 dirname | grep GVFS | sort -u | sed -e 's/GVFS/RGFS/g' | xargs -n1 -P1 mkdir -p
git ls-files | grep GVFS | sed -e 'p;s/GVFS/RGFS/g' | xargs -n2 -P1 git mv
git clean -df
git ls-files | xargs -n1 -P1 file | grep ':.*text' | cut -f1 -d: | xargs -n1 -P1 sed -e 's/gvfs/rgfs/g;s/gvFS/rgFS/g;s/Gvfs/Rgfs/g;s/GVFS/RGFS/g' -i
git add .
```

If you prefer another name, it wouldn't be hard to adapt the renaming script above and replay it on the whole tree.
19bc703

illwieckz added a commit to illwieckz/GVFS that referenced this issue Nov 18, 2017

@illwieckz
rename GVFS to RGFS, fix #7 
This is a renaming example based on suggestion found there:
Microsoft#7 (comment)

This was done doing:

```sh
git ls-files | xargs -n1 -P1 dirname | grep GVFS | sort -u | sed -e 's/GVFS/RGFS/g' | xargs -n1 -P1 mkdir -p
git ls-files | grep GVFS | sed -e 'p;s/GVFS/RGFS/g' | xargs -n2 -P1 git mv
git ls-files | grep Gvfs | sed -e 'p;s/Gvfs/Rgfs/g' | xargs -n2 -P1 git mv
git clean -df
git ls-files | xargs -n1 -P1 file | grep ':.*text' | cut -f1 -d: | xargs -n1 -P1 sed -e 's/gvfs/rgfs/g;s/gvFS/rgFS/g;s/Gvfs/Rgfs/g;s/GVFS/RGFS/g' -i
git add .
```

If you prefer another name, it wouldn't be hard to adapt the renaming script above and replay it on the whole tree.

You can check everything is renamed that way:

```sh
git ls-files | grep -i gvfs
git ls-files | xargs -n1 -P1 file | grep ':.*text' | cut -f1 -d: | xargs -n1 -P1 grep -Hi gvfs
```
4238dad

illwieckz added a commit to illwieckz/GVFS that referenced this issue Nov 18, 2017

@illwieckz
rename GVFS to RGFS, fix #7 
This is a renaming example based on suggestion found there:
Microsoft#7 (comment)

Note that RGFS name is not my own idea but that name fits the need.
If you prefer another name, it wouldn't be hard to adapt the following renaming script and run it on the whole tree.

This was done doing:

```sh
git ls-files | xargs -n1 -P1 dirname | grep GVFS | sort -u | sed -e 's/GVFS/RGFS/g' | xargs -n1 -P1 mkdir -p
git ls-files | grep GVFS | sed -e 'p;s/GVFS/RGFS/g' | xargs -n2 -P1 git mv
git ls-files | grep Gvfs | sed -e 'p;s/Gvfs/Rgfs/g' | xargs -n2 -P1 git mv
git clean -df
git ls-files | xargs -n1 -P1 file | grep ':.*text' | cut -f1 -d: | xargs -n1 -P1 sed -e 's/gvfs/rgfs/g;s/gvFS/rgFS/g;s/Gvfs/Rgfs/g;s/GVFS/RGFS/g' -i
git add .
```

You can check everything is renamed that way:

```sh
git ls-files | grep -i gvfs
git ls-files | xargs -n1 -P1 file | grep ':.*text' | cut -f1 -d: | xargs -n1 -P1 grep -Hi gvfs
```
20ace03

@illwieckz illwieckz referenced this issue Nov 18, 2017

Closed

rename GVFS to RGFS, fix #7 #51

@illwieckz

illwieckz commented Nov 18, 2017

@norpol see #51 ;-)

@sanoursa sanoursa changed the title from GVfs name is already taken guys to GVfs name is already taken Nov 21, 2017

@sanoursa
Contributor

sanoursa commented Nov 22, 2017

There’s currently no confusion between this tool for Git repositories and the GNOME tools, since they don’t even run on the same operating systems. Right now, we are fully invested in our R&D efforts, and we are not actively considering a name change. I understand that many of you are passionate about this issue, but the name will remain GVFS for the immediate future and we will re-evaluate at a later date.
@illwieckz

illwieckz commented Nov 22, 2017

Are you just saying GVFS will never be cross platform? (or assuming GNOME will never run on Windows?)
@illwieckz

illwieckz commented Nov 22, 2017 •
Edited 10 times

That thread has the highest amount of weird statements I ever seen in my life:

  • Having VFS for Virtual File System in acronyms for two Virtual File System products is a coincidence
  • It only becomes a problem when people starts to sue
  • If you read it twice you discover that GVFS and GVFS are obviously not the same name
  • Since it's a Microsoft tool, only Windows-related product names are relevant
  • Since this is a Microsoft tool, unrelated third-party software is not meant to be ported on Windows
  • GVFS (the git stuff) just have to not be ported outside of Windows to avoid issues
  • Because of the product being in development changes can't be made
@afranke

afranke commented Nov 22, 2017

since they don’t even run on the same operating systems.

So that article is a lie?
@sanoursa
Contributor

sanoursa commented Nov 22, 2017

Most certainly not, we are actively looking at other platforms as we speak. However, today they do not run on the same operating systems, so there is no risk of confusion.
@csoriano1618

csoriano1618 commented Nov 22, 2017

@sanoursa I'm not sure running in one or other platform is something important for name collisions, I don't expect someone to think GVFS cannot be confused with GVFS because in the description one says it runs on one platform or the other.

Note that we are receiving comments and complains about this, I'm confident GNOME community and by extend the free software community is displeased by this issue and I hope a solution will come sooner rather than later.
@sam0x17

sam0x17 commented Nov 27, 2017 •
Edited 1 time

Ignoring this issue comes off as extremely arrogant on Microsoft's part. In the past Microsoft dedicated much of its existence to destroying Linux and the free software community. Now if they want to play with the big boys, they need to show some common decency and not act like they are above everyone else. This name is already taken, and the products are extremely similar.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment