HN Explorer

Poll: Should we rename Amber.js?

50 points by wycats ↗ HN
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.

66 comments

[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 130 ms ] thread
ryanstout
change the name: hammer.js is my suggestion.
arbales
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.
grayrest
It'll be fine as long as you keep the beer vs gemstone distinction. ;)
bascule
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.
cjfont
We need to leave some namespace for all the future MVC frameworks to come =P
iotashan
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.
steipete
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.
cyrus_
Searching for "amber js" does bring up the Amber Smalltalk project right away though.
sjce
Wrong conclusion. That means that sproutcore 2.0 is also unlikely to be visible on google. new name.
railsjedi
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/

wycats
Amber is not affiliated with SproutCore at all anymore.
nathanvda
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).

sjce
You haven't taken a look at Amber, have you? It is also a javascript framework
maxdemarzi
Rename it something with an Endoskeleton theme: "terminator.js" "arnold.js" "t-1000.js"
smathy
You should call the 2.0 "SproutCore" and you should change the 1.0 to "SproutUI" or "SproutWidgets" or something.
ofd
Although I think 'substrate' is a cool name, it's already taken in GitHub.
abhishivsaxena
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.

wycats
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.

arbales
If you've been using it and its comfy, just stick with it. People will just care about the code anyway.
aviflombaum
What about resin?
psteininger
That's a name of a Java App Server, not sure if the connection is desirable
JGailor
When I first heard this, all I could think about was "Amber Alert".
igorgue
I like Amber, SproutCore was always hard to pronounce (I'm foreign) or to talk about.
lukeholder
ambert.js amberlite.js amberlin.js amberjack.js ambers.js embers.js
jlbenc
Lager.js
[deleted]
(comment deleted)
fufulabs
Name it something related to its core vision/goal/function. Anything to make products self-explanatory is always an advantage.
joshsusser
How about Spore.js? It's a nice contraction of SproutCore, and doesn't sound as silly as the spoonerism KrautSpore :)
tuhtah
Here are 2 naming suggestions following the cabbage theme for your inspiration: ;) Brocco.js Brussels.js
Detrus
SproutCore was a nice name, Amber doesn't have the same ring to it. Maybe Sprouts? SproutFrame?
jeremychone
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.

Rajiv_N
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)