New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Name: Dockter, Docktor, Dokta, Tudock, Dave? #37

Closed
nokome opened this Issue Oct 26, 2018 · 12 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@nokome
Copy link
Member

nokome commented Oct 26, 2018

The current name of this tool is Dockter. It's a portmanteau of doctor (either the medical or PhD kind) and Docker (the container platform) because it's aim is to make it easier for researchers (either the medical or PhD kind 馃檪 ) to create Docker containers.

But there are five issues with the name:

  • 馃棧 Hard to distinguish in verbal communications: "Was that Docker or Dockter?"
  • 鉁嶏笍 Ambiguity in spelling: "Dockter" or "Docktor"?
  • 馃枼 Confusion at the command line: dockter build . is very similar docker build . and looking for that extra t can consume an extra brain cycle or two to figure out which tool you are using.
  • 馃捇 Autocomplete at the command line: many people use autocomplete in the shell and having the first four letters the same makes this less useful.

As the famous joke says (well actually a riff on the original joke):

There are 2 hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-1 errors.
Leon Bambrick

Please add your thoughts and suggestions in comments below 馃檹. If you like someone's suggested name please 馃憤 it

@nokome nokome added the bug label Oct 26, 2018

@nokome nokome added this to the 1.0.0 milestone Oct 26, 2018

@giorgiosironi

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

giorgiosironi commented Oct 30, 2018

I agree a problem with dockter is not being specific enough to be unique in searches:
907ce6ad-84e8-45a0-a730-f280a40f9735
It also appears to be in use in some other projects as a pun.

@beneboy

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

beneboy commented Oct 31, 2018

I like Dokta. It seems to be in use in the musical world but not in software.

@apawlik

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

apawlik commented Nov 1, 2018

+1 for Dokta from me too.

@nokome

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nokome commented Nov 1, 2018

Pinging @finlay for his vote :)

@finlay

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

finlay commented Nov 2, 2018

dokta works for me too. lower case though, right ?

@nokome

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nokome commented Nov 2, 2018

Yep dokta at the command line

@TimVanMourik

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

TimVanMourik commented Nov 3, 2018

Taking a tweet a bit too seriously here 馃槑
My two suggestions are: 鈥Docker Who鈥 or, as I鈥檓 a big fan of recursive animal acronyms, something like 鈥淒odo: DOdo makes DOcker images鈥!

@nokome

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nokome commented Nov 6, 2018

Thanks for the suggests @TimVanMourik ! My concerns though are:

  • dockerwho (funny as it is) is quite long to have to type at the command line 馃懢
  • dodo is nice, but also implies this tool might go extinct soon 馃檪
@TimVanMourik

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

TimVanMourik commented Nov 6, 2018

  • Haha, without necessarily advocating dockerwho, my general rule is: "No programmer has ever spent more time on typing than on thinking about what to type," so I tend to advocate expressive variable names. And then anything below 10 chars is not too long, IMO, especially with autocomplete. But I totally understand that it is a bit too funny and not quite conveying the professional impression that you'd like.
  • And sure, if you don't wanna jinx your tool with calling it dodo, by all means.

Suggestion: If the coin lands on dokta, give the function a 'who' argument that is an alias of 'help' 馃槑

@nokome

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

nokome commented Nov 6, 2018

Oooh, I really like the who argument suggestion (@TimVanMourik, you should be a CLUX (command line user experience ) designer!)

But how about we leverage the fact that we generate a JSON-LD document with all the software requirements for a project...including their authors. The who subcommand could be a "standing on the shoulders of giants" list of the authors of the current project (if available) and all of the software packages it relies on. e.g.

$ dockter who
Roger Bivand (rgdal, sp), Tim Keitt (rgdal), Barry Rowlingson (rgdal), Edzer Pebesma (sp)

Which for reference is based on filtering the .environ.jsonld file for one of our test fixtures

jq '.softwareRequirements[0].softwareRequirements[] | .author[] | .name' tests/fixtures/r-spatial/.environ.jsonld
@TimVanMourik

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

TimVanMourik commented Nov 6, 2018

Thanks, haha, this I leave to you. Personally I feel that the spirit of Doctor Who is that you never learn the name but that (s)he is always there to help, but this is indeed a nice way to credit contributors.

@apawlik

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

apawlik commented Nov 12, 2018

Many thanks to everyone for your comments and feedback. And the winner is:
dockter !
I am closing this issue for now but thanks to @TimVanMourik we are planning to add dockter who command (see #55)

@apawlik apawlik closed this Nov 12, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment