Comment 4 for bug 1849375

Revision history for this message
Egmont Koblinger (egmont-gmail) wrote :

A bit of bikeshedding:

> I prefer to keep the old name

One reason for changing the name could be to avoid an existing name conflict: there is another terminal called Terminator (written in Java). Although that one hasn't seen a new release in 11 years (according to Wikipedia), and its latest source code commit is 4 years old, so even less active than our Terminator. Still, it's potentially confusing for those searching the web for answers, posting to forums etc.

One reason for not changing the name could be that so far everyone seems to be okay with this name, as opposed to Terminix (now Tilix) which had to change its name due to trademark infringement claims. It's hard to find a name that is new, unique, sounds good, and free of such problems.

Yet another approach is to call it terminator2 or terminator3, although that can look silly as the major version will further increase with time, see e.g. iTerm2 currently at version 3.3.6.

> hanging the major version to 3 (2 is for port to GTK3)

I'm not sure I'm following you here. I find it extremely unlikely that Stephen would appear and continue working on the Python 2 branch towards a Terminator 2.0. If he comes back, he'll sure join the ongoing Python 3 work. There shouldn't be a 2.0 release with old Python. Also it seems to me that the Python change is less risky, breaks fewer things, and is less user-visible than the GTK change was. So why not make a few pre-releases numbered from 1.92 or 1.95 or so, and eventually a Python 3 based stable 2.0?

But of course if you really want to call it version 3 then that's okay too, and reflects the GTK and Python version (I assume most of the users don't care about either of these), it's just an unnecessarily big jump IMHO.

---

Anyway, I don't intend to become a co-maintainer of this project (I'm happy to contribute occasionally, but that's all), so I'll let the future maintainers decide.