Interfaces

Andrea Bernabei andrea.bernabei at canonical.com
Thu Mar 3 19:22:21 UTC 2016


On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Gustavo Niemeyer <
gustavo.niemeyer at canonical.com> wrote:

>
> Okay, change in direction: I've discussed this with the team, and the
> response was 100% positive on the term inversion, so we'll go ahead and do
> it.
>
> We've also managed to hold snapcraft in time, so no further
> incompatibility damage will be made.
>
>
Wow, that's great to hear! :)


> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer <
> gustavo.niemeyer at canonical.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrea,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 10:01 AM, Andrea Bernabei <
>> andrea.bernabei at canonical.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I can't help thinking of a slot as a way to provide something, and if
>>> you want to use that something you "plug" your snap into it.
>>> Mainly because of the mental image I have of the "plugging" action, I
>>> think: there is a slot that sits there in the system, if you want some
>>> functionality you "plug" your snap in it...
>>> Does that make sense? Am I missing something? :)
>>>
>>
>> We haven't questioned this much because the previous terms we used
>> already had slots on that end (the other side wasn't a physical analogy).
>> So when we decided to use plug it was already clear which one that was.
>>
>> Even then, which way is "right" on the physical world depends on what we
>> have at hand. If you're thinking about energy, for example, low voltage
>> devices pretty much always have the plug as the powered side. If you have a
>> USB device at hand, then...?
>>
>> At the same time, I wouldn't mind having inverted the terms before, but
>> now it feels slightly too late to do that once again.
>>
>>
>> gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net
>>
>
>
>
> --
> gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/snappy-devel/attachments/20160303/348a8910/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the snappy-devel mailing list