Hi all --

I think that both "https://bugs.squeak.org" and the readme.md a very clear for newcomers. I see no need to optimize name lookup from within other GitHub projects or contexts.

At this point, the tool "GitHub repo issues" is just practical for managing Squeak issues. It should not indicate that we plan to move project development entirely to GitHub or anything similar.

We should be very careful with interpreting "too much" into the fact that we manage Squeak's issues through GitHub at this point. When talking to newcomers, these are the entry points:


No mentioning of GitHub or that helper repository. It's just an implementation detail. And not worth renaming at this point.


Am 17.08.2023 15:26:33 schrieb Jakob Reschke <jakres+squeak@gmail.com>:


Am Do., 17. Aug. 2023 um 10:33 Uhr schrieb <christoph.thiede@student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de>:
I am concerned by [...] the repo name (which is still very misleading to newcomers).

Renaming it would cause some effort (at least to update links), and I am not sure whether it is worth it at this point. That aside, I could imagine just calling it "squeak". (As in: https://github.com/squeak-smalltalk/squeak) If we ever have a mirror of the trunk source code on GitHub, we should put it in this repository so that the issues are close to it.

squeak-object-memory: I understand where it comes from and it is technically accurate. But sounds quite technical, named with a VM perspective on the matter.
squeak-image: sounds more familiar, but is less accurate since this is not (only) about snapshots.
squeak-issues: the most accurate for the current use, but would need another rename if we ever start putting something relevant into the repository.

Kind regards,