Benefits of Naming

From xoa

What are the benefits to giving a project a name? (Note: Project doesn't have to be software.)

• Common understanding
  • If you and I know what "Project Frobnitz" (PF) is, we don't have to re-establish the project before discussing it
  • If anyone is curious about PF, we can explain it, and then they'll be included and (hopefully) remember
• Personal ownership
  • Easy to say "Andy is the resource for PF" instead of "Andy is the resouce for the project that ..."
    • Might be multiple efforts
    • Might not solve the entire problem
  • Easy for me to say "I work on PF" instead of "I work on this project that..."
    • If listener knows what PF is, shorter explantion
    • If listener doesn't know but cares, allows for followup Q
    • If listener doesn't know and doesn't care, skips awkward explanation
• Target identification
  • Identify a specific set of goals and a target
    • "PF will glonk ten widgets per day" instead of "Working on a project to glonk more widgets"
    • Easier to milestone and measure progress
      • "Rakudo" versus "a Perl 6 compiler"
  • Keeps work focused
    • "Doing X is a distraction to finishing PF" - avoid yak shaving
    • Might be needed in PF's successor, or in the general case, but not in our goals
• Project recall
  • If I ask around about "glonking widgets" no one may know where to direct me
  • If I ask around about PF, someone who's heard that term knows where to point me
  • More identifiable, more searchable, better project recall by people on fringe
• Aligns resources
  • A "PF" binder or SVN repo is easier to identify
  • Easier to say "I need X to accomplish PF" than "I need X for a project to glonk widgets"
• Quicker completion and benchmarking
  • "PF let us glonk eight extra widgets per day!"
  • "We've done some work to glonk extra widgets, and we've got eight extras." "How?" "Well..."
• Future recall
  • "Didn't we do PF in 2008?" vs. "Didn't we already work on glonking widgets?"
  • Failure doesn't taint the whole effort, only the part that was tried
    • "PF was a failure, how else can we glonk more widgets?"
    • "Oh, we tried glonking more widgets. We can't."
  • Success can be distinctly recognized
    • "PF glonked more widgets for us"
• Implementation independence
  • MediaWiki is collaboration software - not a "PHP-based wiki system"
    • Who, other than admins, cares that MediaWiki is written in PHP?
  • Naming allows tech to be a secondary concern
  • Conversely, if implementation is important, it can be stated as a goal or used in the name itself
  • Also allows other implementations to be considered and their ideas incorporated