From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <kyle@kyleam.com>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED,
	SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
Received: from out0.migadu.com (out0.migadu.com [IPv6:2001:41d0:2:267::])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81E901FA13
	for <meta@public-inbox.org>; Mon, 28 Dec 2020 15:29:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers.
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kyleam.com; s=key1;
	t=1609169347;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=4tTqjB+NnmSCWuPaVPKT7rRuxMRr/QcA/IqN1xR0Z3k=;
	b=hYqmG1yxaN0NQPimaFEwEWvLjhnDx2hpPmPjh6lBh/bDSh3RsAffKCiJ2IGa5Ym5+jEQVB
	ZTfs27+OrN+BEbMa4Z37FD56lKdd0RhMOn0lZErPqKOqV7k01MYD/nDoPjM2PhdfWiUfzx
	PvksmjGXcQHKwhk4n+6i3u8fIck3QRwsXbmvjVQjzBmYmyECrj8FsnOVhsj0AVITk136L/
	vRvanJRe5bHokgv3Y7d2unXHCFdpKxcFvMRy96rBfeAbEt++zSouuEsawrqySp5NJ7efHm
	RvzXttr/zS3Nzrk1UiygisI1IULS/9JdEV4Zzjp4sWtMzK3UuWOFEMLDn1mVUg==
From: Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>
To: Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>
Cc: meta@public-inbox.org
Subject: Re: "extinbox" term - was: [RFC 4/7] lei: proposed command-listing...
In-Reply-To: <20201226112649.GB6226@dcvr>
References: <20201215114722.27400-1-e@80x24.org>
 <20201215114722.27400-5-e@80x24.org> <20201226112649.GB6226@dcvr>
Message-ID: <87pn2urltv.fsf@kyleam.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT
X-Migadu-Auth-User: kyle@kyleam.com
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 15:29:07 GMT
List-Id: <meta.public-inbox.org>

Eric Wong writes:

> Eric Wong <e@80x24.org> wrote:
>> +'add-extinbox' => [ 'URL-OR-PATHNAME',
>> +	'add/set priority of a publicinbox|extindex for extra matches',
>> +	qw(prio=i) ],
>> +'ls-extinbox' => [ '[FILTER]', 'list publicinbox|extindex sources',
>> +	qw(format|f=s z local remote) ],
>> +'forget-extinbox' => [ '{URL-OR-PATHNAME|--prune}',
>> +	'exclude further results from a publicinbox|extindex',
>> +	qw(prune) ],
>
> I'm a bit iffy on "extinbox"  It's supposed to be a short
> version meaning "either external index or a public inbox"
>
> However, it's the same length and only two middle letters
> away from "extindex" (short for "external index").

Fwiw my brain made the incorrect extinbox => extindex jump when first
glancing over the command names before reading the descriptions.

> Would "inboxish" be an appropriate term in place of "extinbox"?
> There's precedent with git using the terms "treeish" and
> "committish".

Yeah, that seems okay.  I think "ish" would certainly make it clear to
the reader that there is more going on while avoiding the issue above,
but I wonder if that's really much better than just using "inbox" in the
command names and making the descriptions state something to the effect
of "... or external index".  At least from the standpoint of the search
UI, it seems natural to think of an external index as an "inbox", but
perhaps such an overloading is setting things up for confusion.