Today’s software tools have weird names. We call a “library” some collection of functions that you can use in your program.
I think that software repositories (where apt downloads your programs from) should be the actual libraries, since that’s where you go to get your information; Meanwhile individual packages of information should be called books because they are one solid object containing a bundle of information.
A repository is where something is stored, and if it is usable it is a library.
- A repository of books that can be read is a book library.
- A repository of code that can be imported is a code library.
- A repository of music that can be played is a music library.
I think repository makes more sense than library. A ‘repo’ is also a large storage of something that is very often indexed and catalogued for easy retrieval as well. It also at least ‘feels’ more appropriate for something usually remotely accessed, like package manager repos.
Of course, my well has been thoroughly poisoned on this topic, but I generally agree with others that an analogy doesn’t and shouldn’t have to carry through all the way.
books is a specific type. library is just a different word for collection. So calling them books would be wrong. Because library does not imply a book. In example you can have a library of videos or a library of images.
The term library in the context of software predates software repositories.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_(computing)
It’s basically as old as the computer itself.
Literal libraries of punch cards.
Most computer terminology was created by neckbeard engineers in the early 60’s who hadn’t seen a vagina since they came out through one. I’ve been a proponent of updating the nomenclature for easier reading a long time but I’ve come to realize that’s how you end up with PSscript, so here we are.
What does a vagina have to do with libraries…?
what are sections, chapters, indices? Who’s the librarian?
we don’t need to go all the way into a metaphor
Late Fees!
