Literal Names Policy (i.e. how to name packages)

I agree branding quality can be an indicator of package quality / utility, but I am not sure it is a very reliable correlation. Particularly here where we are simply talking about branding by way of package naming. There is plenty of opportunity to brand through associated web content, documentation, tutorials, support etc. That to me is where ‘branding’ if you want to call it that, gives useful clues when contemplating using a package.

And let’s not forget that github allows ‘organizations’ as ways of grouping and branding individual user accounts. These can be incorporated into the ‘author’ part of an elm package name, which is what I have done with elm-vega. This allows a degree of branding, keeps to the utilitarian elm naming convention and importantly, allows for multi-author contributions to elm-packages.

2 Likes