[Review] SE-0085: Package Manager Command Names

Either works for me to be honest. `swiftpm` works just as well for me as `spm`

Regards,

Rob...

···

On 10 May 2016, at 17:38, Rick Ballard via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:

Question for those of you who are advocating for a "spm" alias: Do you have a strong argument / preference for "spm" vs "swiftpm"? Personally I have been abbreviating the project as "swiftpm" and not "spm" when I talk about it, and have been trying to push that as the preferred abbreviation. "spm" is a few less keystrokes, but is a much more generic, less googleable name; out of context, it's impossible to know what it refers to. Once the project gets enough mindshare, like "npm" has, that might be less of an issue, but I still personally prefer the more descriptive "swiftpm". Thoughts?

  - Rick

I prefer swiftpm because I have enough three letters tools on my machine that I never know what they do without having to open the man page. Having an explicit name will reduce the chance of conflict with other tools and greatly simplify its discovery.

And for those who think this is a too long name, creating a shorter alias in any shell is relatively easy.

···

Le 10 mai 2016 à 18:38, Rick Ballard via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org> a écrit :

On May 10, 2016, at 8:49 AM, Matthew Johnson via swift-build-dev <swift-build-dev@swift.org <mailto:swift-build-dev@swift.org>> wrote:

On May 10, 2016, at 2:19 AM, Dan Appel via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote:

+1 to `swift package` being a little too verbose. However, I like the alternative `swift pm`/`swiftpm` (as noted in the proposal) even less. I have already been referring to the package manager as SPM, so IMO that name does not lose out on any clarity while also allowing it to be terse enough for every day use.

I would not be against having both `spm` and `swift package` as Honza suggested.

+ 1 to the proposal in general and also to adding the `spm` alias.

Question for those of you who are advocating for a "spm" alias: Do you have a strong argument / preference for "spm" vs "swiftpm"? Personally I have been abbreviating the project as "swiftpm" and not "spm" when I talk about it, and have been trying to push that as the preferred abbreviation. "spm" is a few less keystrokes, but is a much more generic, less googleable name; out of context, it's impossible to know what it refers to. Once the project gets enough mindshare, like "npm" has, that might be less of an issue, but I still personally prefer the more descriptive "swiftpm". Thoughts?

And the good news is that all shells support aliases... ever powershell (i guess?!). So it kinda makes sense to choose a name that has a good chance of remaining unique and easy to search on google.

Regards
(From mobile)

···

On May 10, 2016, at 6:42 PM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:

I've been pushing for Swift PM / swiftpm

Pro:
* Easier to google
* Easier to read and mentally parse
* Does not look like luncheon meat

Con:
* Harder/longer to type
* Has no catchy Monty Python songs

-- E

On May 10, 2016, at 10:38 AM, Rick Ballard via swift-build-dev <swift-build-dev@swift.org> wrote:

On May 10, 2016, at 8:49 AM, Matthew Johnson via swift-build-dev <swift-build-dev@swift.org> wrote:

On May 10, 2016, at 2:19 AM, Dan Appel via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:

+1 to `swift package` being a little too verbose. However, I like the alternative `swift pm`/`swiftpm` (as noted in the proposal) even less. I have already been referring to the package manager as SPM, so IMO that name does not lose out on any clarity while also allowing it to be terse enough for every day use.

I would not be against having both `spm` and `swift package` as Honza suggested.

+ 1 to the proposal in general and also to adding the `spm` alias.

Question for those of you who are advocating for a "spm" alias: Do you have a strong argument / preference for "spm" vs "swiftpm"? Personally I have been abbreviating the project as "swiftpm" and not "spm" when I talk about it, and have been trying to push that as the preferred abbreviation. "spm" is a few less keystrokes, but is a much more generic, less googleable name; out of context, it's impossible to know what it refers to. Once the project gets enough mindshare, like "npm" has, that might be less of an issue, but I still personally prefer the more descriptive "swiftpm". Thoughts?

  - Rick

_______________________________________________
swift-build-dev mailing list
swift-build-dev@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-build-dev

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

I also use the word SwiftPM (this exact spelling) when referring to the
project (sometimes swiftpm, but only among friends :) ). However I think
we're talking about two things: 1. commonly used name for the tool (I use
SwiftPM), 2. short alias to make triggering it on the command line easier
(I really like 'spm').

Whatever alias we use, it's an alias - the canonical command is will be
'swift package' either way, which is discoverable and clear. The alias
should serve only one purpose: making it easy to type and remember. And I'm
optimistic that 'spm' can catch on very quickly.

When doing a quick Google search, there's no tool called 'spm' that could
get confused with SwiftPM. Also, if anyone is confused what 'spm' does,
they can just run it, which will show the help section, exactly like npm,
nvm, gem, pod etc.

(One more problem I have with the alias being 'swiftpm': when you try to
use autocompletion e.g. in zsh, if you type 'sw' and hit tab, you'll get
'swift' and related tools, but never 'swiftpm' on the first tab hit, so
you'll really have type it out fully every time, because it doesn't have a
unique prefix. 'spm' is short enough to type in under a second, so I don't
autocompletion is needed here.)

Honza

···

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 6:57 PM Jean-Daniel Dupas via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:

Le 10 mai 2016 à 18:38, Rick Ballard via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> a écrit :

On May 10, 2016, at 8:49 AM, Matthew Johnson via swift-build-dev < > swift-build-dev@swift.org> wrote:

On May 10, 2016, at 2:19 AM, Dan Appel via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:

+1 to `swift package` being a little too verbose. However, I like the
alternative `swift pm`/`swiftpm` (as noted in the proposal) even less. I
have already been referring to the package manager as SPM, so IMO that name
does not lose out on any clarity while also allowing it to be terse enough
for every day use.

I would not be against having both `spm` and `swift package` as Honza
suggested.

+ 1 to the proposal in general and also to adding the `spm` alias.

Question for those of you who are advocating for a "spm" alias: Do you
have a strong argument / preference for "spm" vs "swiftpm"? Personally I
have been abbreviating the project as "swiftpm" and not "spm" when I talk
about it, and have been trying to push that as the preferred abbreviation.
"spm" is a few less keystrokes, but is a much more generic, less googleable
name; out of context, it's impossible to know what it refers to. Once the
project gets enough mindshare, like "npm" has, that might be less of an
issue, but I still personally prefer the more descriptive "swiftpm".
Thoughts?

I prefer swiftpm because I have enough three letters tools on my machine
that I never know what they do without having to open the man page. Having
an explicit name will reduce the chance of conflict with other tools and
greatly simplify its discovery.

And for those who think this is a too long name, creating a shorter alias
in any shell is relatively easy.

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

I have been using SPM both in speech and in text since it's usually very
clear what I'm talking about from context. It's also more familiar to me as
someone who has previously used npm (though the argument "do it because
other people are doing it" is really a terrible one). I'm not terribly
against SwiftPM, but I don't really see a reason for the extra
keystrokes/syllable.

···

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:53 AM Matthew Johnson <matthew@anandabits.com> wrote:

Sent from my iPad

On May 10, 2016, at 11:38 AM, Rick Ballard <rballard@apple.com> wrote:

On May 10, 2016, at 8:49 AM, Matthew Johnson via swift-build-dev < > swift-build-dev@swift.org> wrote:

On May 10, 2016, at 2:19 AM, Dan Appel via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:

+1 to `swift package` being a little too verbose. However, I like the
alternative `swift pm`/`swiftpm` (as noted in the proposal) even less. I
have already been referring to the package manager as SPM, so IMO that name
does not lose out on any clarity while also allowing it to be terse enough
for every day use.

I would not be against having both `spm` and `swift package` as Honza
suggested.

+ 1 to the proposal in general and also to adding the `spm` alias.

Question for those of you who are advocating for a "spm" alias: Do you
have a strong argument / preference for "spm" vs "swiftpm"? Personally I
have been abbreviating the project as "swiftpm" and not "spm" when I talk
about it, and have been trying to push that as the preferred abbreviation.
"spm" is a few less keystrokes, but is a much more generic, less googleable
name; out of context, it's impossible to know what it refers to. Once the
project gets enough mindshare, like "npm" has, that might be less of an
issue, but I still personally prefer the more descriptive "swiftpm".
Thoughts?

I prefer spm. Given the sponsorship by Apple I think mindshare is a
matter of time. That said, I wouldn't oppose swiftpm either if that has
more support.

- Rick

--

Dan Appel

I like the readability of `swiftpm` or even `swift package`, but `spm` is nice for typing.

This is a silly request: what if swift packages were called eggs? Like Ruby’s gems.

And I’ve no idea if there’s already an ‘egg’ tool out there:
egg init
egg update
egg test

···

On 11 May 2016, at 3:35 AM, orta therox via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:

I agree, I think just `swiftpm` is a great mix of ease of use and discoverability, for exactly the reasons you propose. I’ve been trying to always use that when talking about Swift Package Manager for the last few months.

I think this is also better than `swift xxx` due to swiftpm really being a different user context from `swift` commands. Yes, under the hood it’s doing swift-y things, but package management is not compiling.

--

[ ·/ ] Orta Therox

w/ Artsy <http://artsy.net/&gt;
CocoaPods <http://cocoapods.org/&gt; / CocoaDocs <gt3captcha-ios-xcframework - CocoaDocs.org; / GIFs.app <https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/gifs/id961850017?l=en&mt=12&gt;@orta <http://twitter.com/orta&gt; / orta.github.com <http://orta.github.com/&gt;
On May 10, 2016, at 12:38 PM, Rick Ballard via swift-build-dev <swift-build-dev@swift.org <mailto:swift-build-dev@swift.org>> wrote:

On May 10, 2016, at 8:49 AM, Matthew Johnson via swift-build-dev <swift-build-dev@swift.org <mailto:swift-build-dev@swift.org>> wrote:

On May 10, 2016, at 2:19 AM, Dan Appel via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote:

+1 to `swift package` being a little too verbose. However, I like the alternative `swift pm`/`swiftpm` (as noted in the proposal) even less. I have already been referring to the package manager as SPM, so IMO that name does not lose out on any clarity while also allowing it to be terse enough for every day use.

I would not be against having both `spm` and `swift package` as Honza suggested.

+ 1 to the proposal in general and also to adding the `spm` alias.

Question for those of you who are advocating for a "spm" alias: Do you have a strong argument / preference for "spm" vs "swiftpm"? Personally I have been abbreviating the project as "swiftpm" and not "spm" when I talk about it, and have been trying to push that as the preferred abbreviation. "spm" is a few less keystrokes, but is a much more generic, less googleable name; out of context, it's impossible to know what it refers to. Once the project gets enough mindshare, like "npm" has, that might be less of an issue, but I still personally prefer the more descriptive "swiftpm". Thoughts?

  - Rick

_______________________________________________
swift-build-dev mailing list
swift-build-dev@swift.org <mailto:swift-build-dev@swift.org>
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-build-dev

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution