need a name for the server we build from the XFree86 ddx?

[Mike A. Harris]

On Sun, 29 Feb 2004, Egbert Eich wrote:

> > > Maybe Xxof?
> > 
> > Yeah, could do that too, but we'd have to explain it repeatedly.
>
>Right. I'd prefer a name that is simple, project related and self explanatory.
>It's better than any more or less unpronounceable combination of letters
>starting with X.
>X, X11 or Xorg would be fine - unless somebody comes up with a real convincing
>name.

I object to "X", or "X11", because they are _too_ simple, and 
misleading.  When people file bug reports they will get confused 
in the terminology.  X11 is the protocol, and it should be kept 
that way.  "X" is IMHO just too generic.  While some people would 
_like_ for there to only be one X server ever, I think that 
proceeding with that in mind is too close minded.  What happens 
when the next generation X server possibly based on OpenGL is 
ready?  What if we have to ship 2 implementations for a brief 
period that must co-exist with each other.

Please, let's not work ourselves into a hole.  I think if 
anything we should try to future proof things as much as 
possible, and allow for any unknowns to happen in the future.  We 
also should not name things in a way that will be confusing to 
end users.

Users are faced already with a lot of confusing terminology 
around X technology:

- X Window System
- X
- X11
- X11R6
- XFree86
- X server
- X client
etc..

To overload one of those terms is a very bad idea IMHO, 
especially from a technical support perspective.

Support: "What version X11 are you using?"

Smart User: "Do you mean the protocol, the X server, or the full 
             release?"

Joe Blow: "I'm confused by the whole X11 thing, can you explain 
           that again 5 or 6 more times?"

And while naming it "Xorg" is the least confusing of the 3, IMHO, 
it is bad because it overloads the Xorg name as being:

1) A non-profit organization
2) A website
3) An X11 implementation
4) The name of the X server in that implementation.


Having seen users get confused by this type of thing already, in 
particular with Keith's kdrive, I think it is a bad idea.  Right 
now, the freedesktop.org "xserver" CVS module, containing the 
"kdrive" DDX and X servers, is refered by the general public as 
all of the following incorrectly and very confusingly:

- xserver
- X server
- kdrive
- freedesktop.org X server
- freedesktop.org
- fd.o
- fdo

People believe that the freedesktop.org project itself is just an 
X server!  Simply because of being hosted there and some people 
refering to it as 'the X server from freedesktop.org'.  Over 
short period of time, and thanks to non-helpful media, people 
refer to it now as any one of the above names in the following 
manner:

"I am using <insert one of above names here> and having a 
problem, can someone help?"

ie:

"I am using fdo and having a problem, can someone help?"


Do you see the confusion that causes?  There are at least 3 or 4 
X servers hosted at freedesktop.org right now, and while people 
are generally refering to the "xserver - kdrive" X server, they 
usually don't refer to it as that.  When there are several X 
servers available, and someone comes in, we'll get the same above 
statement and not know wether people are talking about kdrive, 
about the X.org X server, or about some other X server project.

I realize some people think the naming is not that big of an 
issue, however I believe we only have one chance to "get it 
right" and try to head off as much public confusion as possible, 
which is why I favour a new name for the server itself at least.  
I think naming the whole collective implementation "Xorg X11R7" 
or whatever is decided upon sounds fine, but I think the server 
should be named Xsomethingelse so that it is very clear when 
people vaguely use the term Xsomethingelse that they mean the X 
server, and not the protocol, not the implementation 
name/version, etc.

Are there any marketing people on the list?  ;o)


-- 
Mike A. Harris     ftp://people.redhat.com/mharris
OS Systems Engineer - XFree86 maintainer - Red Hat