On Wed, 3 Oct 2018 at 16:18, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
��
��
On 2 Oct 2018, at 12:30, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
On Mon, 1 Oct 2018 at 23:16, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Tim Mackinnon wrote
> either by showing {owner}/{project}

What about when there are multiple remotes?

+1 to what you imply here, that the owner/remote should not be auto-coded into the project name.
Remotes are well handled within Iceberg.
The user though could add the owner as free text into a custom project name i.e. "owner-project"

cheers -ben

��
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 6:54 PM Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:


On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 at 15:52, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
��- Maybe, for old projects that don't have a name, we could initialize a project's name as it's repository name?

In any case, I'd expect the project name within Iceberg to match the name of the working directory on disk.

Yes
��
Possibly even the project renamed within Iceberg should rename the disk working directory.

I am afraid of this ^^. This could be a natural and simple mechanism to explain, but take into account that you can have in iceberg different repositories from different places in your disk.
Then this means you will not be able to rename your project if you have a directory with the required name in the same place.

I get your point, and Sean's also.�� Probably over-constraining it to force the Pharo-name and disk-name to be the same.
It would help if the disk working directory is easily discoverable, like showing in a hover popup.
Menu items like "Open Folder Here" or "Open Shell Here" would help workflow.

cheers -ben