What do you think about this?
Locked
 
|
Hi!
The Moose image offers much more than offering moose. For example, I have a postdoc working on Astronomy images and she is using the moose image not because of moose, but because of what is shipped with it. Does something who is not interested in analyzing software may find the moose image useful? The answer is absolutely yes. What about changing the name of the Moose image into something closer to what it really offer? Maybe Pharo4Modelling ? PharoModellingEdition? I think this discussion is important. Cheers, Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: What do you think about this?
|
|
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel
<[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi! > > The Moose image offers much more than offering moose. For example, I have a postdoc working on Astronomy images and she is using the moose image not because of moose, but because of what is shipped with it. Interesting, whayt kind of stuff she is doing with the MOOSE image ? > Does something who is not interested in analyzing software may find the moose image useful? The answer is absolutely yes. > > What about changing the name of the Moose image into something closer to what it really offer? > Maybe Pharo4Modelling ? PharoModellingEdition? > > I think this discussion is important. I also try to push more and more MOOSE as a modelling platform. Yes Pharo4Modelling is maybe a good name. Regards, -- Serge Stinckwich UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: What do you think about this?
|
|
In reply to this post by abergel
remember that Moose is a "data Analysis platform" it is not only for software, so yes somebody not working with software can use it. I have no particular objection to change the name except that changing name means you restart from scratch and have to re-explain to people what it is ... nicolas On 13/03/2014 13:46, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > Hi! > > The Moose image offers much more than offering moose. For example, I have a postdoc working on Astronomy images and she is using the moose image not because of moose, but because of what is shipped with it. > > Does something who is not interested in analyzing software may find the moose image useful? The answer is absolutely yes. > > What about changing the name of the Moose image into something closer to what it really offer? > Maybe Pharo4Modelling ? PharoModellingEdition? > > I think this discussion is important. > > Cheers, > Alexandre > _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
|
|
In reply to this post by SergeStinckwich
> Interesting, whayt kind of stuff she is doing with the MOOSE image ?
Visualizing "molecular clouds”, you know the things where starts are born. Really cool stuff, I am learning a lot. Yesterday evening I’ve learnt that the Milky Way will be crunched by the Andromeda galaxy. I will not be there to experience this, but we are having a lot of fun at imagining and dreaming about all this :-) Alexandre > >> Does something who is not interested in analyzing software may find the moose image useful? The answer is absolutely yes. >> >> What about changing the name of the Moose image into something closer to what it really offer? >> Maybe Pharo4Modelling ? PharoModellingEdition? >> >> I think this discussion is important. > > I also try to push more and more MOOSE as a modelling platform. > Yes Pharo4Modelling is maybe a good name. > > Regards, > -- > Serge Stinckwich > UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) > Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk > http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
|
|
In reply to this post by Nicolas Anquetil
> remember that Moose is a "data Analysis platform" it is not only for software, so yes somebody not working with software can use it.
I know, but actually, I am finding myself using the moose image essentially for GTInspector and Playground. Much more than moose itself. The Moose image is offering something else in addition to Moose, and I think we should embrace this better. Alexandre > > I have no particular objection to change the name except that changing name means you restart from scratch and have to re-explain to people what it is ... > > nicolas > > On 13/03/2014 13:46, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >> Hi! >> >> The Moose image offers much more than offering moose. For example, I have a postdoc working on Astronomy images and she is using the moose image not because of moose, but because of what is shipped with it. >> >> Does something who is not interested in analyzing software may find the moose image useful? The answer is absolutely yes. >> >> What about changing the name of the Moose image into something closer to what it really offer? >> Maybe Pharo4Modelling ? PharoModellingEdition? >> >> I think this discussion is important. >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: What do you think about this?
|
|
In reply to this post by abergel
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 1:59 PM, Alexandre Bergel
<[hidden email]> wrote: >> Interesting, whayt kind of stuff she is doing with the MOOSE image ? > > Visualizing "molecular clouds", you know the things where starts are born. Really cool stuff, I am learning a lot. > Yesterday evening I've learnt that the Milky Way will be crunched by the Andromeda galaxy. I will not be there to experience this, but we are having a lot of fun at imagining and dreaming about all this :-) I have a similar experiment at the moment, working with some physician colleagues for a new lecture at Paris 6 University. We are mixing computer science and astronomy in order to do simulation of planets revolution. I learn also a lot of interesting stuff ;-) Unfortunately, students are using Python for this course. Regards, -- Serge Stinckwich UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: What do you think about this?
|
|
In reply to this post by abergel
Hi Alex, I think by Moose you mean FAMIX :). But, Moose is no longer FAMIX. FAMIX is there only for convenience for some use cases. Moose is now the engines. This is what makes the platform with which we reinvent programming. I said a year ago that Moose will become the IDE. And we are almost there. We still need a couple of extra tools like a Coder, but we can already affect development significantly with the debugger, inspector and playground.
If you want, Moose is the engine with which humane assessment becomes a reality :).
Actually, if you just want an image with just the engines, you can get it in the gtoolkit image: Doru On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel <[hidden email]> wrote:
"Every thing has its own flow"
_______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
|
|
I agree with what Alex said. I came to Moose originally just because I
knew it had Roassal, Glamour & Magritte working together in the
same image. I later discovered FAMIX stuff kind-of related to what I
was doing, but I was unable to work out how to use it for my needs and
had plenty else to focus on for my dissertation. I think you do not
_need_ to change the name. If you want to reposition your marketing of
Moose to push that Moose now does more than before, you just need to
update the home page, where currently "humane assessment" takes prime
spot. Humane Assessment has its own very nice web site so perhaps a
smaller presence linking to that would be acceptable.
To reposition Moose, you could make things more explicit by splitting "Moose is a platform for software and data analysis" into... * Moose is for modeling * Moose is for data visualization * Moose is for software re-engineering or some other combination of three-things taking up the predominant space on the web page. However if you wanted to align more with Pharo, then PharoModelling seems reasonable. cheers -ben Tudor Girba wrote:
_______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
|
|
Hi all,
I agree with Ben. Moose is not a bad name. But on the website there can be more focus on the other features of Moose: that it is also applicable outside the software analysis. Also I do like that it does not contain the name Pharo. It is primarily intended as a tool, that needs some programming to work for your needs. That most of us use this as our development platform, as we like to analyse our own software is secondary. Cheers, Diego On 13 Mar 2014, at 16:32, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote:
_______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
|
|
I just see it that way: there is a traction behind Pharo and Moose does not seem to benefit from it. People who enter the Pharo community by using Pharo directly rarely look at Moose, which is understandable I think. You can see this by the effort being carried on the inspector and the explorer.
Having a name such as ‘Pharo4Modelling’ or ‘PharoOnModels' would implicitly conveys a more powerful Pharo. Where the word ‘Moose’ tells this is something different. Anyway, this is just a meta-thought. Alexandre On Mar 14, 2014, at 6:05 AM, Diego Lont <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I agree with Ben. Moose is not a bad name. But on the website there can be more focus on the other features of Moose: that it is also applicable outside the software analysis. > > Also I do like that it does not contain the name Pharo. It is primarily intended as a tool, that needs some programming to work for your needs. That most of us use this as our development platform, as we like to analyse our own software is secondary. > > Cheers, > Diego > > On 13 Mar 2014, at 16:32, Ben Coman <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> I agree with what Alex said. I came to Moose originally just because I knew it had Roassal, Glamour & Magritte working together in the same image. I later discovered FAMIX stuff kind-of related to what I was doing, but I was unable to work out how to use it for my needs and had plenty else to focus on for my dissertation. I think you do not _need_ to change the name. If you want to reposition your marketing of Moose to push that Moose now does more than before, you just need to update the home page, where currently "humane assessment" takes prime spot. Humane Assessment has its own very nice web site so perhaps a smaller presence linking to that would be acceptable. >> >> To reposition Moose, you could make things more explicit by splitting "Moose is a platform for software and data analysis" into... >> * Moose is for modeling >> * Moose is for data visualization >> * Moose is for software re-engineering >> >> or some other combination of three-things taking up the predominant space on the web page. >> >> However if you wanted to align more with Pharo, then PharoModelling seems reasonable. >> >> cheers -ben >> >> >> Tudor Girba wrote: >>> Hi Alex, >>> >>> I think by Moose you mean FAMIX :). But, Moose is no longer FAMIX. FAMIX is there only for convenience for some use cases. >>> >>> Moose is now the engines. This is what makes the platform with which we reinvent programming. I said a year ago that Moose will become the IDE. And we are almost there. We still need a couple of extra tools like a Coder, but we can already affect development significantly with the debugger, inspector and playground. >>> >>> If you want, Moose is the engine with which humane assessment becomes a reality :). >>> >>> Actually, if you just want an image with just the engines, you can get it in the gtoolkit image: >>> https://ci.inria.fr/moose/job/gtoolkit/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/gtoolkit.zip >>> >>> Doru >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> > remember that Moose is a "data Analysis platform" it is not only for software, so yes somebody not working with software can use it. >>> >>> I know, but actually, I am finding myself using the moose image essentially for GTInspector and Playground. Much more than moose itself. The Moose image is offering something else in addition to Moose, and I think we should embrace this better. >>> >>> Alexandre >>> >>> > >>> > I have no particular objection to change the name except that changing name means you restart from scratch and have to re-explain to people what it is ... >>> > >>> > nicolas >>> > >>> > On 13/03/2014 13:46, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >>> >> Hi! >>> >> >>> >> The Moose image offers much more than offering moose. For example, I have a postdoc working on Astronomy images and she is using the moose image not because of moose, but because of what is shipped with it. >>> >> >>> >> Does something who is not interested in analyzing software may find the moose image useful? The answer is absolutely yes. >>> >> >>> >> What about changing the name of the Moose image into something closer to what it really offer? >>> >> Maybe Pharo4Modelling ? PharoModellingEdition? >>> >> >>> >> I think this discussion is important. >>> >> >>> >> Cheers, >>> >> Alexandre >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Moose-dev mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Re: What do you think about this?
|
|
I agree that people are not exposed enough to what happens in Moose. At the moment, the name is GToolkit. Once it will become available in the Configuration Browser it will be more visible.
But, I hope that in a reasonable time frame, we can get it in Pharo itself. But, for that to happen, I need you lobby :). Doru
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Alexandre Bergel <[hidden email]> wrote: I just see it that way: there is a traction behind Pharo and Moose does not seem to benefit from it. People who enter the Pharo community by using Pharo directly rarely look at Moose, which is understandable I think. You can see this by the effort being carried on the inspector and the explorer. "Every thing has its own flow"
_______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
|
|
> there is a traction behind Pharo and Moose does not seem to benefit from it To a degree this is marketing that might be changed without changing the name of Moose. You want to leverage Pharo by marketing Moose as an "extension" of Pharo ? Why has the Moose home page no mention of Pharo? If that is your strategy then "Moose is an extension of Pharo" should be in big print on the home page. Also if "Modelling" is important apart from helping get "Pharo" into the name, you might consider "MooseModelling is a tools extension to Pharo". Its got nice catchy alliteration. That might make a better entry to Pharo Catalog than just "Moose". That said, I have no particular investment in the "name" Moose. Maybe the name eventually changes to include Pharo, but there are smaller steps that are probably required anyway, which probably should be done first. However GToolkit could do with a name make-over for the Configuration Browser. What does it do? cheers -ben Tudor Girba wrote:
_______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
«
Return to Moose
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |