Re: Re: ANN: Golden Roof AGX Sprint

On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, Martin Aspeli wrote:

>  - People already use AGX to refer to ArchGenXML. There will be all
> kinds of confusion between the old and the new code. Since one is
> generating AT schemas and the other is generating Z3 code, they are
> probably going to have parallel lives for some time to come, and
> having to qualify "AGX-the-Z3-one"  vs. "ArchGenXML-the-old-one"
> each time we write or talk about it will be hell.

The new agx will be able to generate all sorts of things. zope3 code.
The existing plone+archetypes code. Plain python code.

=> for the existing users, it'll "just" be archgenxml 2.0 :-)

>  - ArchGenXML was a terrible name for the old codebase anyway. I

Agreed.

>  - AGX is thus totally meaningless, both from a legacy point of view
> (it's not the same as ArchGenXML) and since it doesn't stand for
> anything anymore.

It *is* agx 2.0 in a way.

> I've pretty much sold Plone on the case that people can use UML
> diagrams to generate content types and get so much for so little
> effort. And if it's meant to appeal to those users, having an
> obscure name with an even more obscure history surely can't help.

Agreed.

> My vote goes for 'Genesis'.

Agreed. Only problem is that you have to compete with a certain
thousand years old book and a British rock band (both great:-) in
google. But I disliked all the naming alternatives (genezix, genesys).

+1

Reinout

-- 
Reinout van Rees                         r.van.rees-1kr/[email protected]
http://vanrees.org/weblog/                  http://zestsoftware.nl/
"Military engineers build missiles. Civil engineers build targets."


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc.  Get Certified Today
Register for a JBoss Training Course.  Free Certification Exam
for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005. For more info visit:
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7628&alloc_id=16845&op=click