Bikeshed discussion: package name

[markerikson]

Time for a lovely bikeshed discussion on what exactly we should name this package!

At the moment, the repo is located under my Github (markerikson/redux-starter-kit), and published as a scoped NPM package under my username (@acemarke/redux-starter-kit).

I've always said that I want to turn this into an official Redux-branded package. That first means moving it to our new reduxjs Github org, which is a no-brainer. (In fact, could probably do that any time now.)

However, there's two questions beyond that:

• What should the actual name of the package itself be?
• How should we publish it on NPM - scoped or global package name?

There's already NPM packages called redux-starter-kit (an app boilerplate project) and redux-boost (which is kinda similar to this package, but also does some data fetching stuff), so it looks like both of those are non-options. (Unless we were to convince the owners to give us the package names or something.)

So, I'm open to suggestions for final package naming and publishing.

/cc @nickmccurdy , @sw-yx , @matthew-gerstman, and whoever else feels like commenting.

[nickserv]

Moving to the reduxjs GitHub organization is clearly a win, though I think we should stick with unscoped packages to be consistent with Redux's own package name. Alternatively if you want to use npm organizations, we could move Redux to @redux/core like Babel did and then we can pick pretty much any name starting with @redux/. I would prefer a shorter package name, but if you prefer redux-starter-kit we could ask the package owner.

@timdorr I notice you own redux-start on npm and it appears to be parked. Could we use it or do you need it for something else?

[timdorr]

That's what I parked it for, so it's available to use.

I also have the @redux-js org on npm. Someone has @Redux and @reduxjs orgs, so I grabbed what I could. If we want to get serious about it, I can reach to npm to see about taking over @Redux (AFAICT, it's not in use, just squatted on).

[nickserv]

Awesome, redux-start is my favorite package name so far. I think it would be best to either attempt to acquire the @Redux org or use redux-start, as npm does not recommend including js or node in package names and org scopes are included in package names.

[JeffBaumgardt]

I would second redux-start or redux-starter and drop kit. I think npm has a policy in place for taking squatted names to official orgs. https://docs.npmjs.com/misc/disputes is once resource I found for this.

[markerikson]

Let's see if we can get @redux on NPM, on general principle, even if we don't immediately use it here.

[nickserv]

I'm not against using the @redux org if we get it, but if we do we need to rename redux to @redux/core to prevent confusion.

[matthew-gerstman]

I vote we optimize for shipping. redux-start sounds like a perfectly reasonable name to me.

It doesn't seem like anyone here has a terribly strong opinion one way or the other and I'd rather start promoting an easy way to get started with redux than worry about what we call it.

[nickserv]

@markerikson What do you think about switching to redux-start at least for now?

[hnordt]

I would like to suggest ReduxKit.

Inspiration: UIKit, ARKit, WatchKit, etc.

[nickserv]

I like that name, but redux-kit is taken on npm.

[timdorr]

@markerikson Do you want to move this repo into @reduxjs and change the name to redux-start? If you can't do that for some reason, let me know and I'll fiddle with the knobs so you can.

[hnordt]

@nickmccurdy it's not redux-kit, it's reduxkit (ReduxKit vs Redux Kit). 😄

[dandigangi]

redux-starter-kit sounds perfect and simple to me.

[markerikson]

Yep, the big problem with that is that the name is already taken on NPM: https://www.npmjs.com/package/redux-starter-kit . We'd have to ask the author for it.

[timdorr]

@redux-js/starter-kit?

[timdorr]

@shotaK Can you donate the redux-starter-kit package name to us?

[markerikson]

I just sent a dispute email to NPM asking about possibly getting @redux or @reduxjs. Got an auto-response saying the request had been received.

[nickserv]

afaik npm generally waits 2 weeks, and if the owner doesn't respond, they give you the namespace

[shotaK]

Yes, I am OK to donate it. How should we proceed?

[timdorr]

@shotaK Can you add @markerikson as a maintainer on npm? He's acemarke on npm and you can do so here: https://www.npmjs.com/package/redux-starter-kit/access

[shotaK]

@timdorr Done.

[markerikson]

Awesome. @shotaK, thank you very much - really appreciate it!

Okay, in that case, I'm inclined to just go with redux-starter-kit as the name, because A) the name is now available, and B) it's the smallest actual change involved (just gotta change the publishing details).

[markerikson]

Oooo-kay, I just hit the button to transfer this repo to the reduxjs org, and it looks like the transfer has completed.

I suppose we can debate a bit further whether we would want @redux/starter-kit or redux-starter-kit, if anyone has any strong opinions on that topic.

[dandigangi]

I feel like this is silly to say because I don't have a specific reason beyond familiarity bias, but I do think scoped packages should be left to addons/plugins/exts/etc. I think this is worthy of it's own distinct repo.

ps shoutout to @shotaK - super cool of you to do that

Edit: I might pull back my above 1st comment. I guess there really is no down or upside to one over the other.

[timdorr]

In lieu of us actually having control over @redux on npm, I say we use redux-starter-kit for now. We can do a Babel-like transition to scoped packages if the org ownership situation changes.

[markerikson]

@timdorr : awright, works for me!

In that case, I'll declare the issue as settled unless a compelling reason comes up to change it.

Long live redux-starter-kit !

:)

[nickserv]

We can transition later, but from what I've seen from Babel 7, there's quite a lot of overhead, especially if your package is frequently used as a peerDependency.

Are there plans to use the @redux org for redux (would be @redux/core) or other core packages?

[timdorr]

Not at the moment. I don't want to plan out anything that's contingent on the opaque decision process within npm, Inc.

[nickserv]

Sorry I think I got confused, do we still not have @redux?

[markerikson]

No, we don't. Tim said he has @redux-js. @redux and @reduxjs are currently squatted, and this afternoon I sent in a dispute email asking about getting them.

[nickserv]

Package/org names with js aren't recommended anyway, so I'm fine with redux-starter-kit until we potentially get @redux. I'm glad we got it, thanks @shotaK!