Closed maxvonhippel closed 7 years ago
Thanks Max. I'd be fine with that. The issue is that we intend to eventually have a BASE-N and stop counting the number of parameter types (which is where the 9 comes from). But we haven't even started the development to move BASE-9 to BASE-N.
On 5/31/17 6:08 PM, Max von Hippel wrote:
This is an extremely low-priority issue, but I recently noticed that the repository name for this project is sub-optimal for it's discovery. If you search 'base' in GitHub, filter out only repositories, and set the language to C++, there are still almost 21,000 results https://github.com/search?l=C%2B%2B&q=base&type=Repositories&utf8=%E2%9C%93.
Could the repository be renamed base9? This would put it with only 4 other search results https://github.com/search?l=C%2B%2B&q=base9&type=Repositories&utf8=%E2%9C%93, rather than 20k+.
@tedvh https://github.com/tedvh , thoughts?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/argiopetech/base/issues/68, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEOeMjGet0P9nOKWBVVLMu7qbyEV8iQHks5r_Z6SgaJpZM4Nr7R0.
That makes sense. Also, this is the first and only search result for Bayesian Analysis for Stellar Evolution
, so I guess users can fairly easily find it by unpacking the acronym. So probably a non-issue ultimately.
I'm very happy with that.
On 5/31/17 7:04 PM, Max von Hippel wrote:
Maybe an alternative would be `BASE: Bayesian Analysis for Stellar Evolution' ? That way users could add "stellar evolution" to their search and find it?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/argiopetech/base/issues/68#issuecomment-305269470, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEOeMos-kA5V73rI_CtEuZz6h7QXPj96ks5r_avIgaJpZM4Nr7R0.
If we did want to switch, I'd suggest astro-base. Otherwise, unpacking the acronym is the only result on github and the highlighted result on Google.
@argiopetech considering the fact that the acronym unpacked yields the right result I think it's fine to leave it as is. But I'm fine with either.
Maybe a good thing to think about closer to the next publication, when search traffic will likely increase for the repository.
Hmm, I'm game for either approach. Don't know which would be better.
On 5/31/17 9:51 PM, Max von Hippel wrote:
@argiopetech https://github.com/argiopetech considering the fact that the acronym unpacked yields the right result I think it's fine to leave it as is. But I'm fine with either.
Maybe a good thing to think about closer to the next publication, when search traffic will likely increase for the repository.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/argiopetech/base/issues/68#issuecomment-305313527, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEOeMgqA3VQynCoqxhI_4JSTBBoqEu4Lks5r_dLDgaJpZM4Nr7R0.
Our current URL is published in a number of documents. I suggest we stick with the current name for now.
sounds reasonable.
On 5/31/17 10:05 PM, Elliot Robinson wrote:
Our current URL is published in a number of documents. I suggest we stick with the current name for now.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/argiopetech/base/issues/68#issuecomment-305317181, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEOeMoHKgeHIulgnwINZmNqACX4Cfuj6ks5r_dYAgaJpZM4Nr7R0.
This is an extremely low-priority issue, but I recently noticed that the repository name for this project is sub-optimal for its discovery. If you search 'base' in GitHub, filter out only repositories, and set the language to C++, there are still almost 21,000 results.
Could the repository be renamed base9? This would put it with only 4 other search results, rather than 20k+.
@tedvh , thoughts?