Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Revisit descriptions of the various libraries we have #824

Open
RobPasMue opened this issue Jan 16, 2025 · 3 comments
Open

Revisit descriptions of the various libraries we have #824

RobPasMue opened this issue Jan 16, 2025 · 3 comments

Comments

@RobPasMue
Copy link
Member

As pointed out in the dev meeting, we should revisit the descriptions for our various packages and move from "Pythonic interface" to "Python client library" or "Python library" in most cases. Pinging @ansys/pyansys-core in case anybody wants to take the lead on the proposal

@moe-ad
Copy link
Contributor

moe-ad commented Jan 17, 2025

@RobPasMue just curious to know what the scope of this will be.
Are we just going to do something like creating a hook that checks for the occurrence of that term in a project's documentation and/or source code, and mandate projects to adopt it. And then leave it to the respective projects to replace occurrences of that term?

@RobPasMue
Copy link
Member Author

RobPasMue commented Jan 17, 2025

I wanted to keep it simple honestly. The goal was to adapt the metapackage only, which is the entry point for most users. Each library should be responsible of adapting their stuff IMO. If they want to keep the "Pythonic interface" term, maintainers should be the one calling the shots in their respective libraries. Creating a tool for search&replacing has very low ROI. I would just do the search and replace myself.

@MaxJPRey
Copy link
Contributor

Yes, this task can and should remain manual as it is limited.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants