Poll: Should we rename Amber.js? | Hacker News Reader

Poll: Should we rename Amber.js?

50 pointswycats65 comments

Yesterday, we announced that we were officially releasing what we had been calling SproutCore 2.0 as "Amber.js".

We did this because we had been using the name Amber as a public codename for over a year (see http://bit.ly/amber-announced), and had used it publicly for a while this year (see an update at http://bit.ly/amber-update and again when we announced TemplateView at http://bit.ly/amber-templateview).

Around the same time (March 2011), we also purchased the domain amberjs.com in anticipation of a rename later this year. During the summer, we internally came to the conclusion that we were going to stick with SproutCore 2.0 as the official name once we released, mostly leaving behind the name Amber as a codename for the project.

In September, JTalk, a Smalltalk implementation written in JavaScript, decided to rename and use the name Amber for their project. As we are not Smalltalk enthusiasts, we did not notice this change (even though it was featured on Hacker News, which we frequent[1]).

Last month, we realized that our goals had diverged sufficiently from the original SproutCore that the similarity of the names was causing mass confusion. We decided to go ahead with the original plan to rename "SproutCore 2.0" to "Amber". It was made especially problematic when a number of existing SproutCore users wanted to continue developing the SproutCore 1.x branch, which only caused additional confusion.

Because we had been casually using the name Amber in public for so long, we didn't do the thorough research we would normally have done while naming a project. Once we launched, a number of people brought Amber Smalltalk to our attention, and we frankly feel sheepish about the whole thing.

We are still planning on launching the website and docs this weekend, so we'd like to make a decision and get this behind us as soon as we can.

So what should we do?

If you think we should rename, we would love some suggestions. Please post your ideas in the comments.

[1] It's possible we missed it because Tom decided to try and improve his "productivity" by messing with his /etc/hosts file to ban Hacker News. It didn't last long.

If you were to pick a different name to avoid overlap with Amber Smalltalk, I'd recommend substrate.js. It conveys a fundamental organizing principle in the same way "backbone" does, and best of all it starts with 's' so all the SCs all over the place will still halfway make sense.

We need to leave some namespace for all the future MVC frameworks to come =P

How about Spore.js? It's a nice contraction of SproutCore, and doesn't sound as silly as the spoonerism KrautSpore :)

I just searched for "Amber" on Google, and the first 5 (!) pages didn't show me anything even remotely Smalltalk-related. I didn't looked any further. Stick with Amber.js.

Searching for "amber js" does bring up the Amber Smalltalk project right away though.

Wrong conclusion. That means that sproutcore 2.0 is also unlikely to be visible on google. new name.

rename it to porter.js

porters are delicious beers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter_%28beer%29) and porters (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter_%28carrier%29 , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter_%28railroad%29) help everyone get things done.

And porter beers usually have coffee (java) flavors.

How about EmberJS ? Domain name is available, it's similar to AmberJS but a little cooler.

Orbit.js

I just registered orbitjs.com but would be willing to donate it. I think the name is a good fit for a framework that aims to keep so many objects moving effortlessly around each other. Contact me (@dgeb) if you're interested.

The name is not Amber, but Amber.js, which for me is clearly a js framework and as a whole a good, unique name. I do not think there will be a lot of confusion.

Also I do think that moving away from Sproutcore is a good choice, because when I talked with fellow rubyists about Sproutcore, I always ment Sproutcore 2.0, but this always caused confusion because people always had 1.0 in mind (it is huge, too much, ... which it is not).

You haven't taken a look at Amber, have you? It is also a javascript framework

Ah, no biggie. Go Ahead and run with Amber.js, launch your site and updates your namespaces. I doubt they'll be any toe-trampling confusion. At most there'd be one or two feathers ruffled, but we're all intelligent adults, and its totally cool to share the name. Sharing /is/ caring after all.

I would sunset SproutCore 1.0, and let the community members who want to continue development fork it & rename the fork. Then use SproutCore 2.0 for the new codebase.

I am glad to see the naming change. SproutCore and SproutCore 2 seem to have very different goals and very different approaches. People had preconceptions of what SproutCore 2 was based on their knowledge of SproutCore. I see that Ember.js, http://emberjs.com, appears to be the final name. Ember.js is a great name and I think the rebranding makes a lot of sense.

I had another idea... continuing the recent naming after tea names (Sencha, Ceylon - new Java-like language), perhaps Assam, Mate(vana) or Lampsang

bikeshed.js?

There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation and naming things.

-- Phil Karlton

What about Ausum.js (pronounced awesome) Other idea: Sauce.js (you can keep the same namespace if you remove the vowels)

I definitely like the idea of keeping the namespace. Sauce.js sounds a bit like a utility library (i.e. underscore.js/Sugar.js) rather than an MVC framework to me though.

You should call the 2.0 "SproutCore" and you should change the 1.0 to "SproutUI" or "SproutWidgets" or something.

1. why not take translate.google.com and see what amber is in some other language which still sounds neat in English.

2.look through the thesaurus for suitable alternatives.

3.Or why not take something from the names of the 3 amigos who are graciously taking it upon themselves to get this great framwork and community happening.

If you rename amber, please, do not rename it brite or bright, as I have already a project with solving the same problematic (with a different approach). https://github.com/jeremychone/brite

I am going to push brite quite a bit next year.

Depends... is Amber still affiliated with Sproutcore at all? If so, something like Sproutcore Slim would be cool

Of course, all the good names are taken: http://slim-lang.com/

Amber is not affiliated with SproutCore at all anymore.

Internal version codenames are not recognizable, and are not expected to be used like this (www.macosxlion.com?) With hindsight, there should have been a site at amberjs.com.

Is the SC namespace going to stay or is the code going to be refactored (ex: SC.Object becomes A.Object)? Just curious.

For the name, how about dotbind.js :)? (I LOVE SC.Binding)

Name it something related to its core vision/goal/function. Anything to make products self-explanatory is always an advantage.

I am an user not familiar with the software, but I think you should leave Amber to Amber Alert and use a different name.

If you end up changing the name (don't think you should), how about honeycomb.js

Brings thoughts of structure, order and productivity.

Stick with "Amber.js". Everything else would be more confusing as it is already ... and it's short! I like it :)

It is a bad name for Googleing. Just like Gemstone for another smalltalk, b.t.w.

Here are 2 naming suggestions following the cabbage theme for your inspiration: ;) Brocco.js Brussels.js

SproutCore was a nice name, Amber doesn't have the same ring to it. Maybe Sprouts? SproutFrame?

Don't just come up with a name. Find a meaning, and let a name emerge from that meaning.

What is your purpose?

Amber Smalltalk is a pretty popular and alive JavaScript project so I vote for renaming.

Rename it something with an Endoskeleton theme: "terminator.js" "arnold.js" "t-1000.js"

If you "feel sheepish about the whole thing" isn't the right thing to do pretty clear?

I think he means that they feel sheepish about not having done more research about the name "Amber" before the announcement.

Although I think 'substrate' is a cool name, it's already taken in GitHub.

Suggestions: peach.js, honey.js and cloudberry.js

I am hungry, in case you were wondering.

The name Amber dredges up some unfortunate memories for me :(

Dr. House?

astrolabe.js - ("star-taker") an ancien navigation instrument. Good for googling and seems fairly unused in the programming world.

What about resin?

That's a name of a Java App Server, not sure if the connection is desirable

change the name: hammer.js is my suggestion.

Call it Milamber.js

Points for guessing the reference.

Guessing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pug_(fictional_character) :P

Correct. =)

ambert.js amberlite.js amberlin.js amberjack.js ambers.js embers.js

Call it Jamboree.js !

It'll be fine as long as you keep the beer vs gemstone distinction. ;)

When I first heard this, all I could think about was "Amber Alert".

AmberCore.js

Core.js

Binder.js

suggest: Sprouts.js

scamber.js

Lager.js

I think you should consult the Amber Smalltalk people

If they agree to a linkback, great. Going ahead with amber.js without their consent would be morally grey.

We emailed them immediately once we realized and they (of course) said they would prefer if we rename to something else.

Because we had been using the name publicly for so long, we decided to lay out the relevant details and ask Hacker News.

If you've been using it and its comfy, just stick with it. People will just care about the code anyway.

Keep the amber letters, but rearrange. (an anagram) Candidates include: merba.js, ebarm.js, rabem.js, etc.

merba.js would be kind of funny since @wycats was on the merb team.

I like Amber, SproutCore was always hard to pronounce (I'm foreign) or to talk about.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com