Re: new name for Deity
On 28 Feb 1998 email@example.com wrote:
> I've abandoned reading messages about Deity's name on debian-devel, that
> debate is not converging.
Since it pretty much broke down into a brain storming session once people
started posting their ideas to debina-devel, and since the point of a
brain-storming session is to gather ideas, and not come to a descision,
it's no wonder that no concensus is being reached.
Might I suggest that if consensus is what was wanted then somebody should
have posted a list of rules (point form), and a time frame in which people
were to participate (perhaps a week). Within a set of rules, at least
people would be in the right mind set to come to a consensus. A
consesnsus will never be reached on such an open topic with an open
timetable. That's just human nature. Especially when dealing with such a
I realise that the brain-storming session wasn't your intention, and then
you had wished people to post ideas to you. The only problem with that
approach is that people can't see any feedback fro mthe collector (unless
each and everyone of them is replied to), and people can not build upon
other ideas. Perhaps what I'm saying is that a brain-storming session
(with a time limit) would have been a better forum than what was used.
> Of the ones I've heard, "Trove" is pretty good. "Packrat" is second best
> but I think it conveys the wrong image for several reasons. A packrat
> is a person who can not throw anything out or an animal that collects
> shiny objects for a mating display, and it also connotes "package" when
> the interesting thing is not the package but its contents. I remain
> convinced that "Deity" is offensive and also embarassing in its arrogance.
Trove isn't bad. I agree that packrat isn't the ideal name. I happen to
think that "deity" is neither arrogant nor offensive (in fact I think it
rather cute), but I am not adverse to having it change. I don't mind a
change, because I've always thought "Deity" was just the project name and
not the final product name.
> I suggest that we let Jason, who wrote the darned thing, pick a name and
> be done with it.
I hope by this comment you are not trying to marginalize the rest of
the Deity team. Although I acknowledge that Jason has put the most work
into this project, there are others who have contributed to it's code, and
still others who have helped design it.
I think the name is ultimately up to the Deity team, and if a consensus
cannot be reached, then the team leader should break the tie.
I have stated before that (as a deity team member) I am not against
"Trove" as the new name for this tool. If that is the name the others
in the project prefer, then I say so be it.
Behan Webster mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org