Naming and branding

[navidcy]

Some discussion was ignited in #414 and I wanted to bring it here.

There's a bit of rebranding going on here, and I'm not sure that it is all intentional. In particular, I would say that our strongest brand is the COSIMA cookbook. But at some point in the distant past, we added cosima-recipes, because the cookbook infrastructure became a python package. Then, the cookbook basically became a name for the database that stores COSIMA experiment information, while people actually used the recipes but kept calling it the cookbook. Now, we have the ACCESS-NRI-Intake-Catalog, which is replacing the cookbook database. That means we don't have a cookbook any more!!

So, I wonder if these changes are an improvement or not. Should we change cosima-recipes back to the COSIMA Cookbook? Or should we rebadge the intake catalog? I think this needs a bit of discussion ...

Originally posted by @AndyHoggANU in #414 (review)

cc @adele-morrison, @AndyHoggANU, @julia-neme, @COSIMA/cosima-contrib

[navidcy]

Hm.... true.

Well as a person who came bit later in the mix, when the cookbook was a package, I always understood the cookbook as the database of experiments + functionality to get_variables, etc, and the recipes as the example notebooks! This PR reflects this understanding of mine...

People now know the recipes as this repo. Do we need to follow historical references and rename the repo as "cookbook"? Won't it bring more confusion? Don't know... I do like "cookbook" name/brand though and, you are correct, deprecating the cosima-cookbook python packages seems to imply that the "cookbook" is gone from our vocabulary.

Originally posted by @navidcy in #414 (comment)

[navidcy]

Yeah, it's hard to see how we can unroll all that without creating more confusion.
Anyone else have any ideas?

Originally posted by @AndyHoggANU in #414 (comment)

[navidcy]

I like the idea of renaming the repo to COSIMA cookbook, and Documented examples -> Recipes, but only once we've fully moved to using intake, right?

Since most users are "new" - have started when the cookbook was already a python package and the recipes a repo - maybe it is worth sending an email to the mailing list or a post on the hive to notify? Plus add a line on the recent change on the readme at least for the beginning.

Originally posted by @julia-neme in #414 (comment)

[navidcy]

I like the idea…

I am worried for the chaos it will bring…

definitely we can’t rename the repo the same as the repo of a python package…

Originally posted by @navidcy in #414 (comment)

[navidcy]

Let's continue the discussion here.

I am very very very skeptical to rename this repo to cosima-coobook since cosima-coobook is already the name of a different repo that is a python package. It will create a chaos. It will make, e.g., references in the ACCESS Hive forum to issues and pull requests of the cosima-recipes break or point towards some random issues in the cookbook....

We could definitely very easily rename the directory Examples that we currently have in this repo to Recipes...

[navidcy]

Or should we rebadge the intake catalog?

@AndyHoggANU what do you mean by this?

[navidcy]

We could definitely very easily rename the directory Examples that we currently have in this repo to Recipes...

We can also of course write the README and the Docs page referring to this repo as a "Cookbook of Recipes" etc. I'm only against renaming the GitHub repo!

[AndyHoggANU]

So, I think I agree that we can't rename the GitHub repos. It would just cause chaos. It's unfortunate, but there you go.
Instead, I like the idea of talking about COSIMA Recipes, rather than the cookbook. Also OK with a "Cookbook of Recipes" if others are ...

[edoddridge]

TBH, it always felt odd to me that the infrastructure used to find and load data was called a cookbook.

BUT, I don't feel a burning need to change the name of this repo - it's a collection of recipes. Calling the repo 'cosima-recipes' and referring to it in conversation as 'the COSIMA recipes' seems perfectly fine to me...

If I were in the mood to cause trouble, I might point out that linguistically, a collection of recipes is a cookbook, but I don't think that matters.

[navidcy]

TBH, it always felt odd to me that the infrastructure used to find and load data was called a cookbook.

Me too! And I regret not voicing this.

Naming is important to convey clarity. But it's also important to do it early and not have multiple names... then confusion ensues.

[navidcy]

Unless there is strong objection I'll go ahead and do this rebranding.

Namely:

The examples will be called "Recipes".
The whole docs or the repo will be referred as the "Cookbook"
We'll use full-blown gastronomy inspired emojis.

🍳🥗🍰🥮

[navidcy]

@julia-neme's feel: #433 (comment)