Huh? So we should never name things that aren’t well known? What kind of logic is that? And how is saying “we’re building on a forgejo instance” the same as “using the wrong thing”?
News headlines are usually worded in a way that’s accessible to most people, and then the article can go into detail about the topic. The other commenter said nothing about how products should or shouldn’t be named. By “the wrong thing”, they likely meant “things that the average person can recognize, but is not the best way to introduce the topic”.
People who haven’t heard of Forgejo will scroll past a headline that says “The German government has started a Forgejo instance”, even if they were interested in the topic. They could have also said “code repository”, but it’s not as eye catching as “GitHub”, a name and logo that a lot of people have seen before.
Also GitHub is the incumbent that is being replaced, and is relevant to the discussion
Because a normal person knows GitHub but not Forgejo. So using the wrong thing they make an association in the person’s mind.
Huh? So we should never name things that aren’t well known? What kind of logic is that? And how is saying “we’re building on a forgejo instance” the same as “using the wrong thing”?
News headlines are usually worded in a way that’s accessible to most people, and then the article can go into detail about the topic. The other commenter said nothing about how products should or shouldn’t be named. By “the wrong thing”, they likely meant “things that the average person can recognize, but is not the best way to introduce the topic”.
People who haven’t heard of Forgejo will scroll past a headline that says “The German government has started a Forgejo instance”, even if they were interested in the topic. They could have also said “code repository”, but it’s not as eye catching as “GitHub”, a name and logo that a lot of people have seen before.
Also GitHub is the incumbent that is being replaced, and is relevant to the discussion