You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As is evident from their names, there is no guidelines on how namespace repositories should be named. I would prefer to have some guidelines to keep the names systematic to make their findability easier. An advantage of optimade-stability-namespace is that it does not need much context to understand what it holds, thus even if moved away from Materials-Consortia organization it will be easy to understand what it holds. An advantage of namespace-cheminformatics is that it would look nice in alphabetical list of all namespace repositories under Materials-Consortia organization.
What neither of them has, is the mention of namespace prefix in repository name, which would be a nice property.
Currently we have two forks of this repository for namespaces:
As is evident from their names, there is no guidelines on how namespace repositories should be named. I would prefer to have some guidelines to keep the names systematic to make their findability easier. An advantage of
optimade-stability-namespace
is that it does not need much context to understand what it holds, thus even if moved away from Materials-Consortia organization it will be easy to understand what it holds. An advantage ofnamespace-cheminformatics
is that it would look nice in alphabetical list of all namespace repositories under Materials-Consortia organization.What neither of them has, is the mention of namespace prefix in repository name, which would be a nice property.
Pinging @rartino and @ml-evs for comments.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: