Should deno bundle be renamed?

[Dan503]

Everyone coming to Deno will think of this command in that way anyway

Naming things is hard and everyone is a highly subjective term. This is what documentation is for.

#2475 (comment)

While Deno is still in version 0.x, a name change away from deno bundle is still an option.

The word "bundle" is extremely loaded with developer expectation. Most developers will expect deno bundle to basically be an in-built version of Roll-Up.

You seem to be strongly opposed to the idea of deno bundle being used as a general purpose bundling service. Maybe it should not be called "bundle" then to help avoid developer confusion?

I was thinking maybe deno package would possibly be a better name.

[Dan503]

If the Deno.bundle() runtime API isn't intended to be a general purpose bundling service then that should maybe be renamed as well.

[ry]

You seem to be strongly opposed to the idea of deno bundle being used as a general purpose bundling service.

General purpose is the intention. We don't have the infrastructure for a lot of it right now, like minification and tree shaking (so they can't easily be done) but maybe some day we will. I think the name is fine.

[Dan503]

Ok, if the intention is to have bundle be a general purpose bundling service at some point in the future then it is best to keep the name as is.