Re: [Simulavr-devel] docs and naming [was: Re: Emergency Makefile and config.h for manual configuration]

[E. Weddington]

Paul Schlie wrote:

> > From: "E. Weddington" <address@hidden>
> >
> > Paul Schlie wrote:
> >
> >    
> >
> > > > I feel that if you continue to call it simulavrxx, it will just make it
> > > > more confusing to users as to what it is.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to propose that you call it simulavr, but with a different
> > > > version number please. I understand that the internals are vastly different.
> > > >        
> > > - please don't. simulavrxx (or whatever one chooses to name it) should not
> > > be implied to the most current release of simulavr, implying that the C
> > > based simulavr is dead, as there are definite advantages to having a plain
> > > old C based simulator, which doesn't require C++ to build, thereby possibly
> > > allowing it to be more easily integrated with/into other tools
> > >      
> > If this is the case, then the project itself should be renamed on Savannah.
> >
> > And then one would have to explain, over and over, what the heck the two
> > "X"s at the end of the name mean..... (Why two? Why not 3?....Huh?)
> >    
>
> Unless I misunderstand, simulavrxx was hosted on simulavr project site as a
> convenience/courtesy; with no implications beyond that. I'd guess both
> projects can/should continue to be co-hosted but use separate cvs sub-
> directories for each?
>  

Which they are.

> Personally the name simulavrxx seems reasonable, and shouldn't be confusing
> given it's heritage (but could possibly be more clearly explained); my only
> concern is that it not be unnecessarily cast as simulavr's most current
> release, as it's not.
>
>  

It's reasonable to us because we're developers.
Try explaining it to the... (let me check)... 33,000+ users who download 
WinAVR. A simple name would suffice and be helpful.