Terminology

[shykes]

This is a thread to discuss Dagger’s terminology (the choice of specific words to designate specific things), our experience with it, suggestions for changing it, etc.

Dagger’s terminology is still changing rapidly. Product terminology is part of product design, and the only way to find the right design is to try lots of bad ones. So, we’ve been trying lots of words to describe the important parts of Dagger. As we use the product, we get a better idea of which words work and which don’t.

Note: this thread is not specific to any particular version of the terminology.

Current terminology

Here is a sample of the current Dagger terminology. I will keep this section updated to match the reality of the code & docs.

• Deployment: a continuously running workflow delivering a specific application in a specific way.
• Deployment Plan: the source code of the deployment, written in Cue.
• Relay: a standalone software component assigned to a single node in the deployment plan.
• Input: data supplied to a deployment by the user
• Version: a snapshot in time of the state of a deployment.

[shykes]

After a few weeks of feedback and hands-on practice, I am leaning towards the following changes:

• Deployment: a continuously running workflow delivering a specific application in a specific way.

Rename to Environment. Rationale:

• It comes up all the time in natural conversation. No matter what the terminology says, I end up using the word “environment” to explain it.
• Solves the ambiguity of the word “deployment” which could be a) the action of deploying once, or b) the result of one or more deployment actions. No such ambiguity with environment.

• Deployment Plan: the source code of the deployment, written in Cue.

Rename to Workflow. Rationale:

• Comes up in natural conversation, regardless of terminology.
• “deployment plan” no longer works if we rename “deployment”
• a single word is better than 2 words. If it’s a fundamental concept, it shouldn’t need a qualifier.
• it’s a good fit for something that is code but not state (“these 5 environments are all executing the same workflow with different inputs”).

[aluzzardi]

Sounds good.

Personally I really like both changes.

[samalba]

Light preference on plan rather than workflow for me. But fine either way.

[icecrime]

I’ve mentioned it before, I think environment is a perfect fit for the first concept 👍

I’m not a fan of workflow, which is also pretty overloaded and sounds like something sequential (which dagger isn’t). I’ve always like Ansible’s terminology of playbook, and more generally something like plan or recipe sounds good to me too.

PS: I feel bad for bike-shedding on naming without taking the time to participate on deeper topics.

[shykes]

Don’t feel bad. I don’t consider this bikeshedding, more like structuralwalling :) You’re a busy guy and any contribution is appreciated.

Personally I am still hesitating between workflow and plan. @samalba and @icecrime : do you think there might be confusion with the concept of terraform plan and pulumi plan?

[shykes]

Update: I opened a PR to replace deployment + plan with environment + plan. #368.

I think “plan” could work, I agree it is less overloaded than “workflow”.

How does everyone feel about possible conflict between the concept of a Dagger plan, with the actions terraform plan, pulumi plan and (perhaps one day?) and equivalent dagger plan ?

[SvenDowideit]

the use of relay (as i was reading the docs) for a node in the graph/pipeline feels disjointed to me - it might work better if you explain the etymology behind your use of it?