Apollo-server: Looking for a new name!

[helfer]

Apollo Server is growing up, and we're looking for a new name that stands on its own. Ideas so far:

• graphql-server
• Pioneer
• Neptune

Ideas are most welcome. We'll probably pick a new name soon, so don't wait until you have the perfect name, just let us know your ideas. Extra points if the package name is still available on npm.

[TimMikeladze]

Artemis. Apollo's sister in Greek mythology.

[stubailo]

Ooh that's neat!

[helfer]

How about this: We call the project Artemis (or Pioneer), convert it to a monorepo, and publish them on npm as: artemis-express, artemis-hapi, artemis-koa, artemis-connect.

Alternatively, we can keep it on the down-low and just call it graphql-server, with the packages being graphql-server-express, graphql-server-hapi, graphql-server-koa, graphql-server-connect.

Thoughts?

[DxCx]

If you mean to rename just apollo-server so they will come as a twins (apollo & artemis) then i think its pretty cool. Anyway i think that grpahql-server-* is pretty lame..

[migueloller]

I personally like graphql-server because it will be easier for new GraphQL developers to find and be comfortable using.

[nnance]

@helfer I like the idea of a monorepo and publishing on npm as artemis-express, etc

[stubailo]

@nnance I'm a bit concerned that with names like artemis-express, artemis-hapi, etc, it will be hard to find them. But that could be solved with marketing as well.

BTW, where does this leave graphql-tools? Should we put that under a similar name? Or perhaps just leave it. Curious what @theadactyl thinks about this as well.

[TimMikeladze]

I echo the sentiments about having non descriptive names, "graphql" is much more descriptive..

[helfer]

@stubailo graphql-tools can just stay graphql-tools, I see no need to change the name there.

[theadactyl]

@stubailo I prefer descriptive names here (e.g. graphql-server) for discoverability and legibility. Also think having another "branded" name could cause some confusion; if we do go that way, planetary > greek mythology imo.

[helfer]

Maybe a consensus could look as follows:

Repo name:

• graphql-server

Package names:

• graphql-server-express
• graphql-server-hapi
• graphql-server-koa
• graphql-server-connect
• graphql-server-core
• graphql-server-module-

How do people feel about these names?

[gadicc]

Am I the only one who liked the name Apollo Server? :) I quite liked the fact that I got a branded full-stack solution for GraphQL, guaranteed to work well together with feature parity. So apollostack is just the client-side stack? But yeah aside from all that I like graphql-server best.

Also, personal opinion is it's a pain to have so many packages, both for the dev and for the user (especially with keeping versions in sync). Do the backend connectors have dependencies on those packages or are they just functions? I'd much prefer to install one package and then import apolloExpress from 'graphql-server/lib/express' or whatever.

[stubailo]

This is explicitly part of un-branding it as a "stack" because people often get confused and think that the parts only work together but not with other GraphQL stuff. As you can see with the docs we changed the domain to apollodata.

[jperl]

I like graphql-* to build off the graphql brand.

[DxCx]

so @helfer are we proceeding with graphql-server-* codename?

[stubailo]

yes, let's follow @helfer's outline.

[DxCx]

Great, then i'll update the monorepo branch for this name :dancer:

[DxCx]

thinking of it,
how would you like to rename functions?
for example, apolloExpress/graphiqlExpress ?

[DxCx]

renaming is ready, just need an answer on the functions themselves

[stubailo]

I think leaving the names as-is should be fine.

[joelgriffith]

Hate to have many too cooks in the kitchen, but when I was looking for a way to use habpi as a graphql instance the apollo server stuff _never_ came up in searches, so I think graphql-server is probably a good one as long as FaceBook doesn't have a tight fist around that.

Just my 2 cents

[stubailo]

Yep, that's what we are going for. BTW, any discussion about this should go in #164 because having two threads isn't great.

[DxCx]

as far as i understand name is chosen, therefore i think we can close this issue...

[helfer]

Okay, graphql-server it is!