Plugin name proposal

[traversaro]

As already mentioned in #25, if we are refactoring the code It could be a good time also to change the name of plugin/device/classes to reflect their actual meaning and increase the readability of the repository for new users.
I expose a proposal that I came up with (inspired mainly from https://github.com/ros-simulation/gazebo_ros_pkgs/tree/hydro-devel/gazebo_plugins), but please make any comment on this.

https://github.com/robotology/gazebo_yarp_plugins/wiki/Proposal-for-names-conventions

(I am not sure about the yarp device driver naming convention, perhaps @lornat75 can provide a more informed opinion).

If we will be ok with this changes and when the times of the changes will come, I can do the dirty work of changing the names and updating all the uses across the repo (Possibly during an italian night).

[MirkoFerrati]

The names...so long!
Why do we need to put Plugin in the end of each class name?
Also, we should remove DeviceDriver and substitute with something shorter...Driver?

[traversaro]

Ok for me, for the DeviceDriver suffix was added in consistency with other yarp devices that I saw in yarp and iCub, but I guess we can go for simply driver.

[traversaro]

@EnricoMingo what do you think?

[EnricoMingo]

Long Names are more understandable in my opinion

[traversaro]

Ok, I have updated the proposal with the two options (the only difference is in the Plugin postfix in the Gazebo plugin class names).
Can we reach a consensus between this two proposal @EnricoMingo @MirkoFerrati @alessandrosettimi @arocchi ? (Obviously other observations/criticism/improvements are always welcome).

[alessandrosettimi]

I think short names are better.

We're already writing the code inside a folder with a "plugin" in the name :).

This convention is also used in the gazebo_ros_pkgs: https://github.com/ros-simulation/gazebo_ros_pkgs/tree/hydro-devel/gazebo_plugins/src

[traversaro]

Ok, in the next few days we'll get a couple of users/developers interested in gazebo_yarp_plugins looking at the code and possibly contributing, so for starting improving the user friendliness of the repo this night I can prepare a pull request (for gazebo_yarp_plugins and iit-coman-ros-pkg) with the proposed changes (for now it seems that the class name without Plugin are winning).

[arocchi]

What about using namespaces?
gazebo::yarp::ForceTorquePlugin
For the case of the Force/Torque sensor, we have both a plugin and a device driver:
GazeboYarpForceTorquePlugin extends gazebo ForceTorquePlugin and sets data inside the device driver GazeboYarpForceTorqueDeviceDriver, which in turn publishes this data by using an AnalogServer

[traversaro]

Personally I don't like to use custom namespaces because we depart from the style of gazebo_ros_pkgs (the closest equivelent already existing) on a side and from the style of existing yarp devices from the other side, but I guess it can be a matter just of personal taste.

[traversaro]

I have committed the modified version to:

• renaming branch https://github.com/robotology/gazebo_yarp_plugins/tree/renaming in gazebo_yarp_plugins
• gazebo_yarp_renaming branch https://github.com/EnricoMingo/iit-coman-ros-pkg/tree/gazebo_yarp_renaming in iit-coman-ros-pkg

If you give them a quicktest then we can merge them.

[traversaro]

commited new naming scheme as proposed in hangout