RFC new modules names for OAIS inspired facilities

[tiborsimko]

In master, we used to have the following names for OAIS inspired facilities:

• BibIngest
• BibArchive
• BibAudit
• (DIP store existing only via BibFormat)
• PIDStore (not really used much)

In next, how shall we call them?

Option 1:

• ingester
• archiver
• auditor
• disseminator
• pidstore

Option 2:

• oais.ingester
• oais.archiver
• oais.disseminator
• oais.auditor
• pidstore

Option 3:

• sipstore
• aipstore
• dipstore
• auditlogs / auditstore
• pidstore

Option 4:

(see discussion below)

[lnielsen]

+1 for option 1 or 3

[jirikuncar]

+2 for option 1 +1 for option 3 -3 for option 2

[jirikuncar]

@tiborsimko what is your preference?

[kaplun]

:) Me I almost liked the oais. prefixes one as it hinted to the oais standard. But I guess they are really not sexy names... +1 for option 3, with, partially joking, auditstore (or auditlogstore) instead of auditlogs.

[tiborsimko]

@jirikuncar I'd favour option 1 at the moment, preferring self-intelligible names whenever possible. (Option 2 would also provide this nicely, but are we willing to go for subpackages?) One head scratcher I'd see with option 1 is that the whole Invenio is "an archiver", so to speak; hence calling one of its components "archiver" may look misleading...

By analogy with "records", "documents", "comments", "workflows", etc, we could also have:

Option 4:

• ingests (or "submissions", but that would confuse more than one)
• archives (or "bags", since the module is essentially creating BagIt bags)
• disseminations
• persistentids
• audits

Option 5:

• sips
• aips
• dips
• pids
• audits

P.S. See also musings on "deposits" in https://github.com/inveniosoftware/invenio/issues/2255#issuecomment-54960291.

[lnielsen]

but are we willing to go for subpackages?

In my opinion not :-)

I don't like option 4 that much.

[jirikuncar]

Conclusion

Option 1:

• ingester
• archiver (see #2279)
• disseminator
• auditor / auditstore (@kaplun)
• pidstore

bold modules already exist

[jirikuncar]

No comments after a week on https://github.com/inveniosoftware/invenio/issues/2258#issuecomment-55563930 hence I'm closing this RFC. New archiver module is waiting in #2279 for integration.