Repository navigation
Rename metadata to package? #129
Description
Activity
Hmm, personally I find that
packageis more general thanmetadataand therefore could mean more different things. If the goal is to clarify which metadata is being referred to, isn't a prefixed a cleaner solution? E.g. if we thinkdata_package_metadatais too long, how aboutdp_metadata?As a more general point: Did I miss a discussion about why we decided to go with
metadatainternally in this repo instead ofpropertieswhich we use internally in sprout, flower, and soil? While I personally thingmetadataeasier to understand thanpropertieslike I mentioned previously, I value consistency with those other repo higher unless we are intentionally trying to make a distinction from whatpropertiesis referring to internally in sprout, flower, and soil.We don't use
propertiesin Flower in public facing things, we call it metadata. Flower was the start of switching to metadata, sincepropertiesis a very Data Package thing and we wanted to be more generic and a bit more precise (and use a term that is more commonly used).And yea, maybe
read_package_metadatais fine. 👍But we still call it
Packagefor the struct, so 🤔 🤔 this isn't urgent, we can think about it more.Looking at the function named
read_package(), I would be unsure whether it would read all aspects of the package or only the metadata. Therefore, I thinkread_package_metadata()is clearer. A package may require more read functions in order to open all its content e.g., reading the resources –read_package_resource()– although that function will be in another program.Reacted by Luke W. Johnston
Since
metadatacould also be about the data for Propagate (e.g. the internal structs). So maybe to make it clearer it is thepackagee.g.read_package(). We already name the structPackage, notMetadata, so we would be aligning on that.