Hei,

I just wanted to ask a short question - why did you pick such a long github namespace?
Having something short is easier to remember, shorter to type, better visible and often recognized as more important (that's how our brains work). Another good example is that since github started to include the user/organization name in the header of issue /PR mails the title is barely readable.

My background is the today I changed my github account from @greenify to @wilzbach and actually changing the name is rather easy - github sets up all redirect automatically.
More infos: https://help.github.com/articles/what-happens-when-i-change-my-username/

There a two things that one shouldn't forgot after the move is (1) to register the old account, so that no one can overwrite the redirects and (2) changing the CI config files (e. g. Travis allows repo protection)

I do know that in such a large project, there still might be some efforts involved (maybe with auto-tester) - so I wanted to ask you on your opinion regarding renaming the github organization?

Btw I have seen that someone already had a similar spirit and reserved d-lang.

https://github.com/d-lang

In case it's not one of you - there is still the friendly github support.

On Friday, 8 April 2016 at 23:49:35 UTC, Seb wrote:
> Hei,
>
> I just wanted to ask a short question - why did you pick such a long github namespace?
> Having something short is easier to remember, shorter to type, better visible and often recognized as more important (that's how our brains work). Another good example is that since github started to include the user/organization name in the header of issue /PR mails the title is barely readable.

The name was chosen before Oscar Brynolf kindly offered up the domain name dlang.org. The <x>lang idiom for languages was only just starting to become common back then.

On Saturday, 9 April 2016 at 00:04:35 UTC, Brad Anderson wrote:
> On Friday, 8 April 2016 at 23:49:35 UTC, Seb wrote:
>> Hei,
>>
>> I just wanted to ask a short question - why did you pick such a long github namespace?
>> Having something short is easier to remember, shorter to type, better visible and often recognized as more important (that's how our brains work). Another good example is that since github started to include the user/organization name in the header of issue /PR mails the title is barely readable.
>
> The name was chosen before Oscar Brynolf kindly offered up the domain name dlang.org. The <x>lang idiom for languages was only just starting to become common back then.

By "back then" I mean in 2011[1]. The original domain was d-programming-language.org and having the github organization match made sense.

http://forum.dlang.org/post/jc0asl$sms$1@digitalmars.com

On 4/8/2016 5:06 PM, Brad Anderson wrote:
> By "back then" I mean in 2011[1]. The original domain was
> d-programming-language.org and having the github organization match made sense.
>
> http://forum.dlang.org/post/jc0asl$sms$1@digitalmars.com

Right, and the original reason for the long form name was how google indexed things.

On Saturday, 9 April 2016 at 03:48:27 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 4/8/2016 5:06 PM, Brad Anderson wrote:
>> By "back then" I mean in 2011[1]. The original domain was
>> d-programming-language.org and having the github organization match made sense.
>>
>> http://forum.dlang.org/post/jc0asl$sms$1@digitalmars.com
>
> Right, and the original reason for the long form name was how google indexed things.

Okay - so this long name is purely due to historic reasons.
How about we move forward and change it to `d-lang`? So that the name and domain match again :)
I am happy to push this, contact the Github support and change links.

Is someone of the core team interested in helping this move?
As mentioned redirects for the repos are automatically created, so the web page and git automagically continue to work.
We could fix a specific date & time, just in case something goes wrong.

On 4/9/2016 12:04 PM, Seb wrote:
> On Saturday, 9 April 2016 at 03:48:27 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 4/8/2016 5:06 PM, Brad Anderson wrote:
>>> By "back then" I mean in 2011[1]. The original domain was
>>> d-programming-language.org and having the github organization match made sense.
>>>
>>> http://forum.dlang.org/post/jc0asl$sms$1@digitalmars.com
>>
>> Right, and the original reason for the long form name was how google indexed
>> things.
>
> Okay - so this long name is purely due to historic reasons.
> How about we move forward and change it to `d-lang`? So that the name and domain
> match again :)
> I am happy to push this, contact the Github support and change links.
>
> Is someone of the core team interested in helping this move?
> As mentioned redirects for the repos are automatically created, so the web page
> and git automagically continue to work.
> We could fix a specific date & time, just in case something goes wrong.

I'm willing to go forward with that if there's a swell of support for it. But for consistency's sake it should be dlang, not d-lang.

On 4/9/16 5:44 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 4/9/2016 12:04 PM, Seb wrote:
>> On Saturday, 9 April 2016 at 03:48:27 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>> On 4/8/2016 5:06 PM, Brad Anderson wrote:
>>>> By "back then" I mean in 2011[1]. The original domain was
>>>> d-programming-language.org and having the github organization match
>>>> made sense.
>>>>
>>>> http://forum.dlang.org/post/jc0asl$sms$1@digitalmars.com
>>>
>>> Right, and the original reason for the long form name was how google
>>> indexed
>>> things.
>>
>> Okay - so this long name is purely due to historic reasons.
>> How about we move forward and change it to `d-lang`? So that the name
>> and domain
>> match again :)
>> I am happy to push this, contact the Github support and change links.
>>
>> Is someone of the core team interested in helping this move?
>> As mentioned redirects for the repos are automatically created, so the
>> web page
>> and git automagically continue to work.
>> We could fix a specific date & time, just in case something goes wrong.
>
> I'm willing to go forward with that if there's a swell of support for
> it. But for consistency's sake it should be dlang, not d-lang.

I think this would be a good thing to do for consistency, but not critical. d-programming-langauge is not ambiguous. If it can be made to work so both "groups" point at the same place, we should attempt at some point.

A couple things though -- we have a lot of automation surrounding github. We should make sure the major players have their input before attempting this. I'm thinking Brad and Vladimir? Also, I think an owner of the github group needs to be pulling the trigger too, so I'm not sure how much we can offload this duty to Seb.

-Steve

On Saturday, 9 April 2016 at 21:44:11 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> I'm willing to go forward with that if there's a swell of support for it. But for consistency's sake it should be dlang, not d-lang.

Before we start this discussion, we should make sure we actually can do it.

dlang is used by Daniel Lang, see github.com/dlang

I have written a nice mail to him (you should be cced), hopefully I hear back from.
Otherwise (because of inactivity), I might be able to talk with the people from Github (I am already in touch with them).

On Tuesday, 12 April 2016 at 11:46:07 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> Also, I think an owner of the github group needs to be pulling the trigger too, so I'm not sure how much we can offload this duty to Seb.

Yes, but I can try my best to do all the other work required (e.g. writing mails to acquire the dlang namespace).

On Tuesday, 12 April 2016 at 11:46:07 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> A couple things though -- we have a lot of automation surrounding github. We should make sure the major players have their input before attempting this. I'm thinking Brad and Vladimir? Also, I think an owner of the github group needs to be pulling the trigger too, so I'm not sure how much we can offload this duty to Seb.

GitHub say that they will redirect all relevant requests (http, git/ssh), so assuming that's true, hopefully nothing will break.

On Tuesday, 12 April 2016 at 17:35:49 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> On Tuesday, 12 April 2016 at 11:46:07 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> A couple things though -- we have a lot of automation surrounding github. We should make sure the major players have their input before attempting this. I'm thinking Brad and Vladimir? Also, I think an owner of the github group needs to be pulling the trigger too, so I'm not sure how much we can offload this duty to Seb.
>
> GitHub say that they will redirect all relevant requests (http, git/ssh), so assuming that's true, hopefully nothing will break.

Yes it is - as long as no new repository is created. That's why you really should avoid to create repositories at the github.com/D-Programming-Language after the migration.

As mentioned I wrote to the Github support about the "dlang" namespace:

> I took a look at the account in question [dlang], and it doesn't appear
> that it is dormant (not all activity on GitHub is public).
> With that in mind, there would be no way for us to transfer
> this name to you without permission from the owner of it.

However I still have a bright message for you:

> It looks as though the **d-lang** account you found is being squatted.
> I've gone ahead and released this username now, so you'll be able to
> create an organization with that username now.
> You'll want to grab that username quickly — it's available first-come,
> first-served. Let me if there's anything else I can do to help!

Did that - that's why a couple of guys got an invitation.
So if we want to move to "d-lang", it is as easy as:

1) Delete the reserved "d-lang" namespace
2) Press on rename at D-Programming-Language
3) Recreate D-Programming-Language (and _avoid_ creating repos here)

I don't know how your protocol for such a change is, is it:

1) Wait a week until for objections
2) Ask a survey (yes, no, don't care)
3) Check approval from Walter + Andrei
4) Something else

@Cybershadow in case of a positive decision, do you want to be the "trigger guy"?

Cheers,

Seb

PS: In case you are worried - Step 1) will kick me out of the temporary organization.