Name of project module hierarchy root question

[alanz]

Where should the top of the project set

Language.Haskell.Support
Language.Haskell.Daemon
Language.Haskell.IDE.Daemon
Tools.Haskell.Daemon
Tools.Haskell.Tools

Let the bikeshedding begin

[cartazio]

IDE.Haskell.Tools :))))

[alanz]

I like it, but maybe

IDE.Tools.Haskell

[mgsloan]

I tend to like it when the package name relates to the module name, so I'm not sure if I like IDE.Haskell. I'd be in favor of Haskell.Ide or possibly Language.Haskell.Ide. Not everyone follows the convention of not capitializing acronyms, but personally I prefer it. I think I picked that up from tibbe's style guide

[mgsloan]

Also, while we've already got haskell-ide, Chris Done doesn't mind if we re-use the name ghc-server.

[alanz]

There has already been a discussion on irc about whether the current name is appropriate. The consensus is that it is not.

What it should be is one question, and whether it is worth changing is another.

Ghc-server could be a good one. Ide-backend is unfortunately taken.

But ide-tools or ide-tools-haskell could work quite well too

[alanz]

Given the project renaming, I propose

Haskell.Ide.Engine

as the top level name

Or perhaps

Ide.Engine.Haskell

[bitemyapp]

@alanz Apologies for the bikeshedding:

I think engine isn't adding any information here for the namespace, perhaps

Haskell.Ide or Language.Haskell.Ide for the top-level? With Backend (or similar) for the server bits, API (or similar) for the stuff exposed as a library?

[alanz]

Well, by using Engine we are not polluting the name space for any future person wanting to write a haskell IDE.

Perhaps

Language.Haskell.Hie

And yes, it is a bit circular, but it is shorter than before.

[mgsloan]

I like Haskell.Ide.Engine, since it's intercalate "." . map capitalize $ splitOn "-" packageName

[alanz]

That was my initial thinking too. I like maintaining expectations

[bitemyapp]

@alanz @mgsloan concurring on Haskell.Ide.Engine