Rename simapp

[okwme]

Summary

some chains are importing simapp from cosmos-sdk when they should be importing their own app (for ex cosmos/gaia#1883). i think this comes from a misunderstanding of the meaning of "simapp"—as in the simulations that are run on every chain. Rather simapp is more of a "sample app" so i suggest renaming it to "sampleApp" or something similar.

Problem Definition

Proposal

[alexanderbez]

The original intent was for an app to be used in the SDK's simulation testing framework, hence "SimApp". But totally down to rename it :)

That being said, post 0.47 world, simapp will be completely internal (it already is in main). So apps/repo's won't even be able to import it even if they wanted to -- no foot gun.

So sort of a moot issue at this point?

[okwme]

ja seems the issue will go away naturally 👍

[gjermundgaraba]

Can I offer a counterpoint to this? Many people go into the SDK repo to figure out how to use the SDK, and the simapp name is still confusing and leads to misunderstandings. A better name, even if fully internal, seems like a good idea to me.

[tac0turtle]

do you mean moving simapp to internal?

[gjermundgaraba]

I mean renaming simapp to make it clear what it is :)

[julienrbrt]

If someone reads the docs, it is the first line in the README. I am confused why it is confusing 😅
A person onboarding should read the docs.

Imho, as it is the app we use for actually testing the SDK (from e2e to simulations) and that it is a chain, Sim App makes sense. At least it has never been confusing when I onboarded because it was explained in the docs.

I think (I don't know) before people imported simapp to reduce boilerplate and because there was not a clear separation from the app and the testing utilities (which could then be confusing I imagine). But, as bez mentioned above, is resolved in v0.47+.

[gjermundgaraba]

Perhaps not a huge problem, but I think the name gives the wrong impression; of being an app for simulation. Yes, it is also used to run simulation tests for the SDK, but for most people using the SDK repo it's a demo app to see how to implement, wire up and do different things. It's a reference implementation for all intents and purposes (outside of the SDK's internal usage of it).

I guess it's not a big deal, but even if a name is documented to mean something else than what is seems like, it doesn't make it any better :) <- in my opinion.

Edit: another issue I realized that bugged me a while back was that the names also muddles up the sim name when used for simulation testing. The testutils sims package is a good example, because it gets used a lot in the simapp, but is actually a testutil package for simulation testing (but easily confused with testing utility for simapp). I think the fact that sim/sims/simapp is used in multiple places and mean different things just add to my feeling that the SimApp should be better named.

[robert-zaremba]

1. everyone in cosmos ecosystem knows simapp
2. that being said, I 100% agree that there could be a better name. Since no external application should import simapp as a package, then there should not be a problem to rename that.

[gjermundgaraba]

everyone in the cosmos ecosystem knows simapp

That may be true for veterans in the ecosystem, but I am not sure this is true for newer additions. And it is not for people who already know this that I am suggesting to change the name, but for new people coming in and needing clarification - just like I did.

Perhaps it is indeed inconsequential, but I'm a stickler for good naming because it requires less documentation and makes thing smoother :)