search

larroy / clearskies_core

Open source, distributed, secure data synchronization using the clearskies protocol
GNU Lesser General Public License v3.0
136 stars 15 forks source link

Rename '3rd-party' to 'vendor' #15

Closed jewel closed 10 years ago

jewel commented 10 years ago

This is just a suggested alternative name for the '3rd-party' directory that is used in ruby, php, etc. Not a big deal either way.

larroy commented 10 years ago

Thanks jewel, why do you think vendor is better? according to wordreference means "seller", I'm not a native speaker, but for me 3rd-party sounds a bit better.

jewel commented 10 years ago

It's just a widely-used convention. I think the reason the word makes sense is that it's used in business to mean "source". A company consumes or combines multiple things from its vendors to create its product.

The reason it caught my attention is probably because it's written "3rd-party" instead of "third-party", which felt awkward to me. From sampling the internet, it looks like some C++ projects use "ext", being short for "externals". Others use "lib".

detunized commented 10 years ago

I actually liked 3rd-party. It stood out, sorted first and didn't mix with the rest of the files. Now it's visually in the middle of the list.

larroy commented 10 years ago

I also prefer 3rd-party, but as I'm not a native speaker I yielded to jewel's better judgment

detunized commented 10 years ago

I think 3rd-party is quite common. I saw it in a couple of places like Chrome for example. Vendor I saw a lot in Rails.

larroy commented 10 years ago

Let's vote in the group then.

cachapa commented 10 years ago

I vote for lib. I prefer 3rd-party to vendor, but honestly don't care much how it's called as long as we can organise the libs.

Speaking of which, did we reach a decision regarding moving jsoncons to the same folder as the other libs?

Daniel Cachapa Sent from a mobile device On 5 Feb 2014 14:48, "Pedro Larroy" notifications@github.com wrote:

Let's vote in the group then.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/larroy/clearskies_core/pull/15#issuecomment-34168968 .

larroy commented 10 years ago

For me it's fully ok to move jsoncons there to be consistent, I will do it.

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 2:52 PM, cachapa notifications@github.com wrote:

I vote for lib. I prefer 3rd-party to vendor, but honestly don't care much how it's called as long as we can organise the libs.

Speaking of which, did we reach a decision regarding moving jsoncons to the same folder as the other libs?

Daniel Cachapa Sent from a mobile device On 5 Feb 2014 14:48, "Pedro Larroy" notifications@github.com wrote:

Let's vote in the group then.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub< https://github.com/larroy/clearskies_core/pull/15#issuecomment-34168968> .

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/larroy/clearskies_core/pull/15#issuecomment-34169642 .

Pedro Larroy Tovar | http://pedro.larroy.com/

detunized commented 10 years ago

So now we have a 3rd option =) I vote for 3rd-party because it sorts to the top and because lib sometimes is used to put compiled libraries into. Might get confusing.