New package: IPFFiles v0.1.0

[JuliaRegistrator]

• Registering package: IPFFiles
• Repository: https://github.com/andreapasquale94/IPFFiles.jl
• Created by: @andreapasquale94
• Version: v0.1.0
• Commit: bb401587882d44890cb7f5a7589bee4ae879819a
• Reviewed by: @andreapasquale94
• Reference: https://github.com/andreapasquale94/IPFFiles.jl/commit/bb401587882d44890cb7f5a7589bee4ae879819a#commitcomment-141441260
• Description: ESA Intepolation Files made easy.
• Release notes:

- initial release of IPFFiles.ij, a lightweight package for providing allocation-free access to binary ESA interpolation files.

[github-actions[bot]]

Your new package pull request met all of the guidelines for auto-merging and is scheduled to be merged when the mandatory waiting period (3 days) has elapsed.

Since you are registering a new package, please make sure that you have read the package naming guidelines: https://pkgdocs.julialang.org/v1/creating-packages/#Package-naming-guidelines

---

If you want to prevent this pull request from being auto-merged, simply leave a comment. If you want to post a comment without blocking auto-merging, you must include the text [noblock] in your comment. You can edit blocking comments, adding [noblock] to them in order to unblock auto-merging.

[LilithHafner]

Thanks for making this package!

Because everyone who uses Julia shares the General registry namespace, we try to make sure the names are accessible to everyone (even folks who are not going to be using your package). When it comes to abbreviations, we try pretty hard to avoid non-obvious abbreviations. (more detailed/official explanation here)

Thinking about IPF, specifically,

From https://search.brave.com Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis ("IPF") Information Presentation Facility ("programming IPF")

From https://www.acronymfinder.com/IPF.html International Polar Foundation Internal Protection Fault

From the README of the package "ESA/ESOC interpolation files or IPF"

So I'm guessing IPF stands for "interpolation files", in which case IPFFiles is redundant (files twice).

Perhaps ESAInterpolationFiles.jl? I think ESA is reasonably unambiguous. European space agency is the first result on brave, google, bing, and yahoo; and esa is a direct redirect to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Space_Agency on wikapedia (not even a disambiguation page).

---

The repo description "ESA Intepolation Files made easy" makes the package name ESAInterpolationFiles.jl sound quite appealing.

[andreapasquale94]

[noblock]

Thank you for the answer.

Unfortunately, my initial assumption is to avoid including ESA in the package name as this is not associated with the agency and I don't want to "block" any ESA-associated potential name, just in case at some points there are some open source packages from the agency itself.

InterpolationFiles.jl would be too generic as a name and Ipf.jl too short, that is why I went for IPFFiles.jl as suggested in https://github.com/JuliaRegistries/General/pull/105181.

[LilithHafner]

Ah, I see @goerz's first suggestion was also ESAInterpolationFiles, which means it is a pretty guessable name.

my initial assumption is to avoid including ESA in the package name as this is not associated with the agency

We have no requirement that package authors are affiliated with agencies or organizations that appear in their package names. For example, AWS.jl, OpenAI.jl, etc.

I don't want to "block" any ESA-associated potential name, just in case at some points there are some open source packages from the agency itself.

Thank you for your concern. I appreciate this respect for the namespace. We do have a bit of a first-come-first served policy and you're first so ¯_(ツ)_/¯. Also, and more importantly, there is plenty of ESAXxxxYxxx.jl namespace left even with ESAInterpolationFiles.jl registered.

InterpolationFiles.jl would be too generic as a name

I agree that InterpolationFiles.jl would be too generic a name, but if I am correct that IPFFiles is an abbreviation for InterpolationFileFiles, then that would also be too generic. Because the package only handles ESA files, it is appropriate to include ESA in the name.

[andreapasquale94]

We have no requirement that package authors are affiliated with agencies or organizations that appear in their package names.

This is exactly my point here, since I am affiliated with the ESA (I work there as a consultant) :) but since this package has been developed during my free time, I would prefer not to use any “affiliative” name.

In case this is not possible, I will evaluate re-registering the package as suggested.

[goerz]

There’s absolutely no implication of “affiliativeness” by having ESA as part of the package name. I would treat descriptiveness and clarity as pretty much the only consideration for choosing the package name.

[andreapasquale94]

This can be closed. Registration was re-triggered with the required changes.

[goerz]

Closing in favor of https://github.com/JuliaRegistries/General/pull/106167