search

fsprojects / FSharp.UMX

F# units of measure for primitive non-numeric types
MIT License
154 stars 10 forks source link

Move to fsprojects? #7

Closed eiriktsarpalis closed 5 years ago

eiriktsarpalis commented 5 years ago

Perhaps we could move the repo to github.com/fsprojects for bigger visibility

alfonsogarciacaro commented 5 years ago

That makes a lot of sense! What was the process for that? Should I give @sergey-tihon admin rights so he can move the repo?

sergey-tihon commented 5 years ago

@alfonsogarciacaro this may work but the formal process is here - https://github.com/fsprojects/FsProjectsAdmin

bartelink commented 5 years ago

While we're talking - .Extra (or x appendages etc) stuff in general I don't find useful in names.

Maybe something like UnitOfType ( FSharp.UnitOfType if it has to be given it actually is a pretty lang specific concept). UomTag, TypeTags)

alfonsogarciacaro commented 5 years ago

@sergey-tihon Ok, I sent you an invite link :)

@bartelink Yes, I agree Extra is not very good but I did wanted to convey the meaning the lib provides some extra units of measure beyond the standard (numeric) ones. I'd prefer to avoid the FSharp. prefix (as this is not a Microsoft package) and abbreviations in the namespace, but I'm open to any other name :)

bartelink commented 5 years ago

Good point re the FSharp. I guess my reason for not wanting UnitOfMeasure in full directly in the name and/or putting .Extra is that, while it's using UOM to achieve it's ends, it's really achieving a result on a pretty different axis. My other concern is that it's a pretty singular thing, and naming it that way versus suggesting it's from a big family of things you might need to consider. More names I'm not entirely happy with: UnitOfKind, UnitOfTag ? ... UnitKind, UnitOf, UnitOfIdentity, UnitId, United ...

alfonsogarciacaro commented 5 years ago

On the other hand, focusing on the method to achieve the result has another inconvenience. If I'm not mistaken, you cannot use this library to add units of measure to your custom types, it's a closed set. That's why I was thinking when naming that the library enables UnitOfMeasure on some Extra types :)

Anyways, if we change the namespace we should change the package name and deprecate this one. Any thoughts on this anyone else? @eiriktsarpalis @sergey-tihon

eiriktsarpalis commented 5 years ago

I would probably name it FSharp.UoM

sergey-tihon commented 5 years ago

@alfonsogarciacaro owner access does not let me transfer it =( I've send you invitation to fsprojects-transfer org owner, please transfer project there and then I'll move to fsprojects

alfonsogarciacaro commented 5 years ago

@sergey-tihon Done, thank you! :+1:

sergey-tihon commented 5 years ago

@alfonsogarciacaro done!

bartelink commented 5 years ago

Nice - now, about that name ;P My weightings for name segments, in an attempt to spark a debate:

eiriktsarpalis commented 5 years ago

FSharp.UMX "unit of measure extensions"