Bikeshed discussion: naming and marketing, again

[markerikson]

Issue Update

The current plan is to rename the RSK package to "Redux Toolkit" / @reduxjs/toolkit. See #248 for current migration status.

Original Post

Back in #36 , we debated name options for a while. We settled on redux-starter-kit because that's basically what we already had (@acemarke/redux-starter-kit , which itself came from reduxjs/redux#2859 ), and the NPM package name was donated to us in that thread.

Unfortunately, I'm seeing a lot of folks say that they didn't even want to look at the lib, because the name "starter" suggests it's only good for beginners, like these examples:

• https://twitter.com/Vall3y/status/1191514976177074177
• https://twitter.com/thehousecat/status/1190383361044299776
• https://www.reddit.com/r/reactjs/comments/dp55sh/just_finished_making_this_dashboard_for_trading/f5tlup8/

I don't want to rename RSK, but clearly the name is throwing people off, and that concerns me.

I tried asking about ways to improve the marketing, and mostly got a bunch of random name suggestions.

Soooo... I'm gonna open this up for discussion again, and ask if we should seriously consider renaming RSK to something else, and if so, what.

Overall, the options are:

• Don't rename it at all, just live with it and try to improve marketing
• Rename it:
  • Some other global NPM name
  • Something scoped, likely under @reduxjs/
• Merge everything straight into the Redux core (Discussion: consider expanding the Redux core redux#3321)

Pros and cons:

• Don't rename:
  • 👍 keeps existing SEO; no migration step
  • 👎 folks continue to get confused about the benefits and audience
• Rename to something global:
  • 👍 maybe a better name?
  • 👎 migration, loss of SEO; have to find an available package name
• Rename to something scoped:
  • 👍 differentiates from other random Redux packages; precedent from react-testing-library
  • 👎 migration, loss of SEO
• Merge into core:
  • 👍 becomes very obvious that this is official and the default approach; everyone gets it
  • 👎 everyone gets the deps; no tree-shaking atm; recursive dependencies from libs to core?; migration, loss of SEO; where do all the RSK docs go?

Merging RSK into the core is highly unlikely, and @timdorr has said he's against that. Still, it's a hypothetical option.

If we were going to rename it, my inclination would be something like @reduxjs/toolkit.

Thoughts?

[mfpiccolo]

How hard would it be to achieve including it with tree shaking? That would be my vote if that was achievable. If not, I would vote for don't rename.

[Ericnr]

I see no downside to merging into core, if tree-shaking is possible. Without tree-shaking it's probably not an option. Second best would be using the @Redux scope, as it shows right away its an official redux lib. @redux/starter-kit or @redux/toolkit sounds good.

[markerikson]

There are at least a couple potential technical issues with merging everything into the core:

• Apparent duplication of createStore and configureStore
• Recursive dependency: redux-devtools-extension depends on redux, but now we'd depend on it unless we went back to setting up the devtools manually
• Added dependencies for folks who aren't using the rest of the pieces (although this would maybe be less of a bundle issue with tree shaking, it's still a bunch of additional stuff that many folks don't currently use)

We do currently own the @reduxjs scope on NPM, but not @redux. There's some confusion over whether Dan currently is the actual owner of that or not. Honestly, I'd just go with @reduxjs since that matches the Github org and we own it.

[stevensacks]

Use apollo-boost as your guide.

Drop the word “starter”. redux-kit might suffice. Not a starter kit, just a kit. But kit also has connotations of a toy, or something for teenagers. Plus, anyone who previously gave RSK a miss isn’t likely to use this lib if it still is named similarly. I think choosing an entirely new name is the only way to fix the situation.

Apollo’s docs make no bones about boost. They don’t offer it as an option. From the get-go they say that boost is how you use apollo, and only mention the non-boost methodology later. They go all in on boost because for most people it will suffice, and you won’t even know when it won’t suffice until you hit those situations.

You have to make a decision about how important this kit is. If you want more people to use it, make it sound like it’s the best way to use redux for most situations and only in specific cases would you want to go custom, with instructions on how to import all the individual pieces separately, just like boost.

Check out this page to see what I mean:
https://www.apollographql.com/docs/react/get-started/

Note that they use the term “starter kit” in the docs, but not in the actual name of the library. They clearly had this conversation prior to releasing it and came to the same conclusion you reached the hard way. 😉

[phryneas]

As I think scoping would be the way to go, to make it stand out from all the non-official redux boilerplate toolkits (you noticed how it's received if you're not saying that "it's official" in this thread, didn't you?), I'll suggest to split that option up:

• add the scope, keep the name ( => optimally @redux/starter-kit, if that doesn't work out @reduxjs/starter-kit )

  • 👍 differentiates from other random Redux packages; precedent from react-testing-library
  • 👍 👎 almost no loss of SEO, since domain, articles etc can stay largely unchanged
  • 👎 migration
  • 👎 still has "starter" in the name

• add the scope, change the name ( => @Redux[js]/[tool]kit )

  • 👍 differentiates from other random Redux packages; precedent from react-testing-library
  • 👍 "starter" is gone
  • 👎 loss of SEO
  • 👎 migration

[markerikson]

Unfortunately it seems to be the word "starter" that's throwing everyone off, so if we're gonna rename it, that's gotta go.

[markerikson]

Looking through https://twitter.com/acemarke/status/1190296894494388229 and https://twitter.com/acemarke/status/1191518131765821443 , here's a list of all the proposed names (even the silly ones). Repeated suggestions counted in parentheses:

• "initials only"
• @redux/starter-kit
• ++
• Accelerator (2)
• Advanced Kit Pro With Hooks
• Basics
• Batteries
• Catalyst
• Concurrent Mode
• Dev Kit
• Essentials
• Fire
• Focus
• Kit (3)
• Lightning
• Magnify
• On Rails
• Plus (3)
• Pro Max
• Recipes
• Reduxnator 3000
• Rocket
• Setup
• Shortcut
• Simply
• Sparkle
• Super Kit
• Superstar Kit
• Supreme Kit
• Toolbox
• Toolkit (4)
• Tools
• Tools
• With-No-More-Boilerplate

The ones that actually have multiple votes are:

• Toolkit
• Kit
• Plus
• Accelerator

And as one person pointed out, a search for redux toolkit turns up RSK as the first hit already.

There is an existing redux-toolkit package on NPM, and ironically it's pretty close in concept. But, it was also last published over four years ago. There's also http://rekit.js.org/ , a CLI and IDE for React+Redux development.

So yeah, if we were going to rename it, it seems like @reduxjs/toolkit would be the most likely option. "Redux Toolkit" as a name is similar enough to "Redux Starter Kit", and we could abbreviate it as "RTK" instead of "RSK".

Here's the obligatory Twitter poll on renaming options:

https://twitter.com/acemarke/status/1191755498749648896

[markerikson]

Okay, so let's discuss what would actually be needed to do this migration. We would need to:

• Publish the new package name
• Get the new redux-toolkit.js.org domain name
• Point it at the docs site
• Also somehow have redux-starter-kit.js.org still pointing at the docs site. (This may not require any work, if the .js.org settings just point both names at the same place.)
• Rewrite all the docs content to scrub and update the package name, the actual name, and the abbrevations
• Also preferably come up with a single "sales pitch" description line. I've been using multiple variations in different places, and it would be nice to have something short, descriptive, and consistent.

Anything else?

The other complication is that #226 is in the process of trying to switch the docs site over to Docusaurus v2.

edit

Oh. We'd have to re-create all the tutorial repos and sandboxes, again. Oops.

[phryneas]

We'll need a version bump (patch/minor/major?) of the old package name that either

• throws an exception with a migration message (testing library currently does that)
• re-exports everything from the new package and prints a mirgation guide on installation/in dev environments on the console

[markerikson]

Another line of thought on naming suggestions :

Any good words that start with 'S' and go well with "Kit", to keep the RSK acronym?

Or, another suggestion that popped into my head : "Redux Standard Toolkit" / @reduxjs/standard-toolkit? Keeps "toolkit", emphasizes that this is the default approach.

[stevensacks]

Forget about SEO, that doesn’t matter. It’s already been established that the current name is unpopular and confusing so what’s the benefit to hanging on to it? None. This is a rebranding. Start fresh.

Names that are unique and sticky are better than ones that are descriptive and accurate.

Fire
Catalyst
Rocket (alliteration ftw) 🚀

[markerikson]

I wouldn't say that the name is unpopular, just that the "starter" term is confusing people.

I would like any new name to be meaningful (ie, not a random code word), and ideally as similar as possible to the existing name. "Redux Toolkit" seems to be the best option at this point.

[markerikson]

@MPLIS : honestly, I'm against redux-boost simply because Apollo is using that naming already, and I want to avoid any confusion or appearance of copy-cat behavior.