Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Discussion: Naming conventions for katas #156

Open
RandomSort opened this issue Nov 9, 2018 · 3 comments
Open

Discussion: Naming conventions for katas #156

RandomSort opened this issue Nov 9, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@RandomSort
Copy link
Contributor

RandomSort commented Nov 9, 2018

We are currently using terms like basic, intermediate & advanced in at least 2 different ways.
Partly we use "basic" to dignify basic git topics, and partly we use the terms as "levels" within each topic.

There is also some confusion around whether to prefix or postfix the difficulty term.

@JKrag
Copy link
Contributor

JKrag commented Nov 9, 2018

I suggest that we stop using the difficulty levels to group topics, as this could be better and more flixibly done in the OVERVIEW.md or other "storylines", and git trainers will choose their own order anyway in their training material.

This means that we could use the difficulty ratings within each topic, e.g. merge-beginner, merge-intermediate, merge-advanced. But this poses the question of whether a numeric "level" would give us a more open ended option to keep building more advanced exercises?

This was referenced Jul 9, 2019
@JKrag
Copy link
Contributor

JKrag commented Jul 9, 2019

Thinking further about this, I believe that e.g. staging-beginner, staging-intermediate, staging-advanced should be granularity enough. If we ever get around to making more than three exercises in a topic like staging, then I bet that the extra ones will be with some specific additional learning target or restriction like "staging-with-git-gui" or "staging-ignored", and thus have other good names.

@RandomSort
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think we should actually remove the basic/advanced nomenclature.

I think there should be an introductory one and then we should be good with "themed" names as you suggest :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants