Name #34

Closed
opened 2024-01-29 13:13:28 -07:00 by trinity · 29 comments
Owner

After reading bonsai/repo#18 I realized coreutils as a package may conflict with a certain incredibly popular (GNU) project with the same name.

Maybe the name should be changed so as to avoid confusion? In conversations with Emma I've suggested bonutils, which makes sense to me because of the Latin root bon (good, i.e. bonus which means "good" in Latin and from which the identical English adjective draws heritage).

After reading https://git.tebibyte.media/bonsai/repo/issues/18 I realized `coreutils` as a package may conflict with a certain incredibly popular (GNU) project with the same name. Maybe the name should be changed so as to avoid confusion? In conversations with Emma I've suggested bonutils, which makes sense to me because of the Latin root *bon* (good, i.e. *bonus* which means "good" in Latin and from which the identical English adjective draws heritage).
Owner

“coreutils” is short for core utilities which is the common name for the basic set of userspace utilities needed for a system to run.

https://git.busybox.net/busybox/tree/coreutils
https://github.com/uutils/coreutils
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Core_utilities

“coreutils” is short for core utilities which is the common name for the basic set of userspace utilities needed for a system to run. https://git.busybox.net/busybox/tree/coreutils https://github.com/uutils/coreutils https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Core_utilities
Author
Owner

That's true but using a generic name is perilous when the den is occupied by a giant. Consider uutils, which is packaged as a great variety of names which must be pretty inconvenient for users of multiple systems who have to either (1) look up and (2) install the package with their package manager, or (1) find that list and (2) install the package on their system, versus GNU coreutils users who can simply (1) install coreutils which is the same basically everywhere. Busybox, as a multi-call binary, avoids this because the project itself is the core utilities and tooling, so it gets away with being busybox.

Additionally, packaging the Bonsai coreutils as coreutils on Bonsai systems breaks a comfortable assumption that coreutils means the GNU core utilities collection, and wishing this to be done elsewhere brings a similarly unintuitive pattern to the existing sufferers of GNU+Linux. Even if the game is won and the (for our purposes) ideal scenario of Bonsai's coreutils displacing GNU's occurs, existing systems that rely on coreutils being GNU coreutils will have to migrate and it'll be a small but regular hassle.

My point is that naming Bonsai coreutils coreutils will lead to unpredictable packaging and there is no way to avoid this except to rename them to something less generic, either by placing the coreutils under a separate project with its own name (which I don't believe is a good option) or renaming the coreutils themselves.

And for me personally it is easier to imagine the displacement of humans upon the Earth than to imagine the displacement of GNU coreutils within computer systems.

That's true but using a generic name is perilous when the den is occupied by a giant. Consider uutils, which [is packaged as a great variety of names](https://uutils.github.io/coreutils/book/installation.html) which must be pretty inconvenient for users of multiple systems who have to either (1) look up and (2) install the package with their package manager, or (1) find that list and (2) install the package on their system, versus GNU coreutils users who can simply (1) install `coreutils` which is the same basically everywhere. Busybox, as a multi-call binary, avoids this because the project itself is the core utilities and tooling, so it gets away with being `busybox`. Additionally, packaging the Bonsai coreutils as `coreutils` on Bonsai systems breaks a comfortable assumption that `coreutils` means *the GNU core utilities collection*, and wishing this to be done elsewhere brings a similarly unintuitive pattern to the existing sufferers of GNU+Linux. Even if the game is won and the (for our purposes) ideal scenario of Bonsai's coreutils displacing GNU's occurs, existing systems that rely on `coreutils` being GNU coreutils will have to migrate and it'll be a small but regular hassle. My point is that naming Bonsai coreutils `coreutils` will lead to unpredictable packaging and there is no way to avoid this except to rename them to something less generic, either by placing the coreutils under a separate project with its own name (which I don't believe is a good option) or renaming the coreutils themselves. And for me personally it is easier to imagine the displacement of humans upon the Earth than to imagine the displacement of GNU coreutils within computer systems.
Owner

If you can bring me a good name that isn’t bonutils then I will consider it.

If you can bring me a good name that isn’t bonutils then I will consider it.
Author
Owner
  • bark (the part of the tree you can touch)
  • fruit (what you get from the tree)
  • bon
  • broots (bonsai's roots)
  • sticks
- bark (the part of the tree you can touch) - fruit (what you get from the tree) - bon - broots (bonsai's roots) - sticks
Owner
  • bark (the part of the tree you can touch)
  • fruit (what you get from the tree)
  • bon
  • broots (bonsai's roots)
  • sticks

Preferably it should be something that tells users what these tools are.

> - bark (the part of the tree you can touch) > - fruit (what you get from the tree) > - bon > - broots (bonsai's roots) > - sticks Preferably it should be something that tells users what these tools are.
Owner

Consider uutils, which is packaged as a great variety of names

for the record, uutils is packaged that way because it changed names from rust-coreutils to uutils-coreutils at some point in the past.

> Consider uutils, which is packaged as a great variety of names for the record, uutils is packaged that way because it changed names from rust-coreutils to uutils-coreutils at some point in the past.
emma added the
question
label 2024-02-07 20:26:34 -07:00
emma pinned this 2024-02-18 14:50:40 -07:00
emma added the
enhancement
label 2024-02-18 14:50:46 -07:00
Owner

What about toolset?

What about toolset?
Owner

Or rootutils?

Or rootutils?
Owner

Or rootutils?

This sounds specifically related to root user tools

> Or rootutils? This sounds specifically related to root user tools
Owner

broots

Specifically against this because of broot.

rootutils

This sounds specifically related to root user tools

Agreed. If that name is to be used at all, it should only be for a subset of tools for system administration.

>broots Specifically against this because of [`broot`](https://github.com/Canop/broot). >>rootutils >This sounds specifically related to root user tools Agreed. If that name is to be used at all, it should only be for a subset of tools for system administration.
Owner

butils?

`butils`?
Owner

toolchest?

toolchest?
Author
Owner
  • butane - bonsai utilities and none else. It doesn't quite fit with the theme but goes hard.

toolchest sounds a lot like toybox. butils is alright but generic - it could be confused with sutils.

  • saitools

  • bonsaibox

  • shears - the tools you use with a bonsai

- butane - bonsai utilities and none else. It doesn't quite fit with the theme but goes hard. toolchest sounds a lot like [toybox](https://github.com/landley/toybox). butils is alright but generic - it could be confused with sutils. - saitools - bonsaibox - shears - the tools you use with a bonsai
Owner

interface

`interface`
silt closed this issue 2024-03-15 21:11:31 -06:00
Owner

oops

oops
silt reopened this issue 2024-03-15 21:11:42 -06:00
Author
Owner

interface makes sense and is neat but sounds too similar (to me) to a network interface.

interface makes sense and is neat but sounds too similar (to me) to a network interface.
Owner

What about userface? For user-facing utilities? Kinda silly but I kinda like it.

What about userface? For user-facing utilities? Kinda silly but I kinda like it.
Author
Owner

userface has a nice ring to it. What about sapwood? The userland utilities are the wrapper around the core (the kernel; if we ever make our own we can call it heartwood).

userface has a nice ring to it. What about [sapwood](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood#Heartwood_and_sapwood)? The userland utilities are the wrapper around the core (the kernel; if we ever make our own we can call it heartwood).
Owner

userface has a nice ring to it. What about sapwood? The userland utilities are the wrapper around the core (the kernel; if we ever make our own we can call it heartwood).

These also have the issue of not necessarily being descriptive to an end use about what exactly this repository or package is.

> userface has a nice ring to it. What about [sapwood](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood#Heartwood_and_sapwood)? The userland utilities are the wrapper around the core (the kernel; if we ever make our own we can call it heartwood). These also have the issue of not necessarily being descriptive to an end use about what *exactly* this repository or package is.
Owner

@trinity @silt I really like userface. What do you think?

@trinity @silt I really like userface. What do you think?

userface

The user's face?

I suppose it sounds like user interface, but these are coreutils and there is more to them than being a user interface. They provide essential userland functionality, so you could call them userfunc, but that sounds weird.

> userface The user's face? I suppose it sounds like user interface, but these are coreutils and there is more to them than being a user interface. They provide essential userland functionality, so you could call them userfunc, but that sounds weird.
Owner

User-facing utilities!

User-facing utilities!
Author
Owner

uu maybe, like two closed eyes (verbally "ooo").

`uu` maybe, like two closed eyes (verbally "ooo").
Owner

uu maybe, like two closed eyes (verbally "ooo").

again, this doesn’t really communicate much to the end user about what this software collection is

> `uu` maybe, like two closed eyes (verbally "ooo"). again, this doesn’t really communicate much to the end user about what this software collection is
Owner

What about something incorporating the word “suite”?

What about something incorporating the word “suite”?
Author
Owner

bonsuite, usuite, suitelife... I don't know.

bonsuite, usuite, suitelife... I don't know.
Owner

I just came up with harakit. I’m pretty set on it, as it embodies zen (the idea of the center/core of the body, or hara, being in the gut) and is succinct and descriptive enough, but I want your thoughts. @trinity @silt

I just came up with harakit. I’m pretty set on it, as it embodies zen (the idea of the center/core of the body, or hara, being in the gut) and is succinct and descriptive enough, but I want your thoughts. @trinity @silt
Owner

rolls off the tongue well, fits with the theme, i like it

rolls off the tongue well, fits with the theme, i like it
emma closed this issue 2024-06-23 23:23:38 -06:00
Author
Owner

I forgot to chime in on the issue, only telling Emma verbally - I really like the name harakit and am happy with this choice.

I forgot to chime in on the issue, only telling Emma verbally - I really like the name harakit and am happy with this choice.
trinity unpinned this 2024-06-24 06:25:11 -06:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Milestone
No project
No Assignees
4 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: bonsai/harakit#34
No description provided.