On 11/11/11 17:48 +0000, Angus Thomas wrote:
There's been a lot of discussion recently about the best way to
name
the components that our users interact with.
We have sought to arrive at a set of names with which are:
- Descriptive and intuitive
- Internally consistent
- Consistent with the names used by similar applications which users
might be familiar with
Given that we'll need to update the code to reflect the new names,
along with the related documentation etc., there's a great deal to be
said for actually settling on a set of names.
So, here's the list:
Image template -> Component Outline
Assembly -> Component Blueprint
Deployable -> Application Blueprint
Deployment -> Application
Pool Family/Environment -> Cloud
Pool -> Cloud Resource Zone
User Defined Realm -> Cloud Resource Cluster
Provider -> Cloud Resource Provider
Hardware Profile -> Cloud Resource Profile
Ugh, where is clalance when we need him? Seriously, how many times do
we need to rename these things? While not all are neccessarily bad
(though Deployment => Application is definitely horrible), I am just
tired of the churn here on naming. How can we expect users to know
what we are talking about if we constantly are changing our glossary?
-j
Angus