Re:Names should be cute, not descriptive
by ryanjshaw on Tuesday January 10, 2023 @09:48AM
(#34325622)
I feel it's helpful to distinguish between "applications" and the "services" that make up those applications.
- application name: not descriptive unless you are 100% sure scope will not change over time (e.g. a specific report mandated by a regulator); exception to the rule: I actually like using initialisms because they start off descriptive but then over time people use the initialisms exclusively and its almost like you invented a non-descriptive word without the initial confusion
- service names: start with a monolith that is just the application name (or suffix "Core"), only split into other services once you have a good reason, and scope is clear, and then give it a descriptive name
- application name: not descriptive unless you are 100% sure scope will not change over time (e.g. a specific report mandated by a regulator); exception to the rule: I actually like using initialisms because they start off descriptive but then over time people use the initialisms exclusively and its almost like you invented a non-descriptive word without the initial confusion
- service names: start with a monolith that is just the application name (or suffix "Core"), only split into other services once you have a good reason, and scope is clear, and then give it a descriptive name