We should ask the PM to chime in and post it in #naming on Slack.

Is the name "delegated type" up for review? I don't see any delegation happening in the code. It looks more like a "subtype", or "secondary type", or something like that.

I feel like app/packs (or something like it) is a good name because it communicates to developers that it's not just JavaScript that can be bundled, it's also CSS, images, SVGs — you name it. I realize what can be bundled is wholly dependent on the bundler you use, but even esbuild supports bundling CSS. So couldn't this possibly be confusing?

Naming matters for both idealogical and practical reasons.

Also agree that <svelte:slot> is perhaps a little confusing since it replaces the slot attribute rather than the slot element, so <svelte:fragment> would make more sense

Just to reiterate the discussion on the RFC, there was a suggestion that we change <svelte:slot slot="foo"> to <svelte:fragment slot="foo">, since it's the counterpart to a <slot> rather than an equivalent to it

remaining: 0, callbacks: [] r: 0, // remaining outros c: [], // callbacks p: outros // parent group

Why the obfuscation of remaining to r and callbacks to c? This is fine for function-local variables but in this instance makes the code significantly harder to reason about? There is no notion of what c and r mean.

While there is some precedence in other frameworks for using as, the word doesn't fit well. Since you are adding functionality to elements I like the word add better (and it only has 1 more character).

one problem with 'behavior' is that's the terminology we use to describe all of a component's encapsulated logic — methods, transitions, etc.

This change was made because GitLab License Management is now renamed to GitLab License Compliance. After review with users and analysts, we determined that this new name better indicates what the feature is for, aligns with existing market terminology, and reduces confusion with GitLab subscription licensing features.

If the add-on is a fork of another add-on, the name must clearly distinguish it from the original and provide a significant difference in functionality and/or code.

It’s true that there are two hard problems in computer science and one of them is naming things. Why? Because good names are important. A good name teaches about purpose and responsibility, so you have to spend some time thinking about it.

You don't "sanitize your output" you encode it for proper context within the application it is being presented. You encode the output for HTML, HTML Attribute, URL, JavaScript

I would call this output encoding instead of sanitization

Don't be discouraged when you get feedback about a method that isn't all sunshine and roses. Facets has been around long enough now that it needs to maintain a certain degree of quality control, and that means serious discernment about what goes into the library. That includes having in depth discussions the merits of methods, even about the best name for a method --even if the functionality has been accepted the name may not.

Therefore, it's easy to search around for tweets/blog posts/talks that say "ES7 Decorators" and find that it's become the accustomed name for it.