Renaming of node-red-contrib-components

Hello node-red enthusiasts,

I published node-red-contrib-components in February, but never really cared to use the forum until now, that some users started to discuss about it.

There is a suggestion by @Steve-Mcl to rename the node to node-red-contrib-subroutine.
I am not so happy about that, since my original intention was to really get close to something like a component, which for me is a stand-alone piece of functionality, that can be reused many times.
But maybe the difference between subroutine and component is just academical?

It is a fact, that some of the community did not understand my node in that is was not clear to them, what node-red-contrib-components does. Maybe the renaming would help to make users understand?

Please feel invited to discuss that with me/us. I would be glad to put more work into the project, if I knew that the community appreciates and uses it.

Thanks for the contribution. I have not tried it yet, but the description from @Steve-Mcl looks very interesting. I am using subflows, but, sometimes it feels a bit limited... So, what you've done would be a very good addition. Now, back to your question about naming.
One of the challenge with nodered is to find the "right" flow for the job. When I go to flows.nodered.org I often use the search to help me.
So the question, is how to find your contribution through search?
"components" is not the first term that would come to my mind for searching this.
"subroutine" would... So, from a marketing point of view :slight_smile: node-red-contrib-subroutine is better IMHO.
GV

2 Likes

For anyone reading this cold (without seeing the other thread) this is what i wrote in an attempt to clear up the misconceptions by stating it was analogous to a subroutine...


So now I am using this set of nodes - here are my thoughts. (Spoiler - I'm liking it)

  • It should really be called node-red-contrib-subroutine (IMO) as that is pretty much what it does...

  • unlike a subflow where you cant choose msg or flow as an input, you can with this node - very nice touch...Setup ( comp start node)...

Using it ( use comp node)...

Apart from the odd naming of nodes...
image
... this is a pretty good set of nodes.

Me likey - a lot :slight_smile:

:+1:

PS, if i were pushed for alternative naming, it'd be...
node-red-contrib-components --> node-red-contrib-subroutine
comp start --> Subroutine Define
comp return --> Subroutine Return
use comp --> Subroutine Call


So first up, my appologies if I seem pushy - if the node name and the 3 nodes this package remain un-changed, I will still use it as I find it very useful.

My fear was that it is very hard to "discover" and the naming (to me) seems a bit alien (in programming terms) and not really intuitive. For example, what I would call subroutine call...
On the pallet its called "use comp" image
When dropped on the editor its called "run ???" image

@ollix has cleared this up a bit on the github issues (about his future intentions & why he believes the name to be apt (i have replied to that too)) but I dont have the same vision and I concede i may be incorrect. As it stands though, I feel subroutine is something people "get" and is analogous to its current functionality

Again, I must stress, I find this contribution to be very good and very useful (almost wish it was part of core) but feared users might not discover it or understand it as is.

While I've not used these nodes, I do feel that "components" is just too generic, it really doesn't describe what it does in a way that is discoverable.

To make matters worse, the word "component" is already widely used in front-end programming and so is already being used in Node-RED to describe modules of front-end code for various frameworks including Dashboard, uibuilder and others.

2 Likes