Gustavo Niemeyer gustavo.niemeyer at
Fri Mar 4 14:13:20 UTC 2016

Hey Sergio,

There was so much discussion around these terms that it'll probably be
quite difficult to change them now.

Just as some insight into aspects that were considered:

- The term "consumes" implies depletion, which is unsound for some of the

- Both consumers and providers must "implement" their end of the interface
for it to work, so "implements" meaning one end would create terminology

- If we implement and consume interfaces, we don't have terms to refer to
the two endpoints in a tangible way; what is today "the plug" becomes "the
consuming endpoint of the interface" ("the consumer" won't cut, because
that's the snap itself)

- We need terms for the connection aspect; we might still "connect" the
consumer to the implementer, but the analogy is poor compared to connecting
plugs to slots.

- Plugs and slots are both short and have the same number of letters.

... and so on.

On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Sergio Schvezov <
sergio.schvezov at> wrote:

> El 03/03/16 a las 16:15, Gustavo Niemeyer escribió:
> >
> > 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.
> Can I bikeshed for a bit?
> Instead of inverting the term I want to pitch `implements` and
> `consumes` for `interfaces`. There is no analogy (with physical devices
> that can confuse folk) and they are well understood terms, and fit well
> with `interfaces`.
> --
> snappy-devel mailing list
> snappy-devel at
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:

gustavo @
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the snappy-devel mailing list