Grove v1alpha1 API currently defines a top-level custom resource named PodGangSet that groups together PodCliques that need to be gang-scheduled and managed together, where a PodClique is a group of Pods that share the same Pod template. A PodGangSet CR can be horizontally scaled, and each PodGangSet replica owns and manages all the PodClique CRs that are instantiated exclusively for that replica.

Now, inside a PodGangSet replica, Grove supports auto-scaling of PodCliques, either independently or as part of a group when defined in a PodCliqueScalingGroup configuration. When scaling a PodClique independently, Pods are added to (or removed from) an existing PodClique. On the other hand, when scaling a PodCliqueScalingGroup, each PodCliqueScalingGroup replica owns and manages the PodClique CRs that are instantiated exclusively for that replica.

As a result, a PodGangSet CR essentially manages the lifecycle of a set of PodCliques--some independently and some as groups--within and across all of its replicas.

Hence, I would like to propose to rename the PodGangSet CR as a PodCliqueSet, which would be represent something that is closer to its actual functionality.

I would love to hear your arguments for or against this proposal, as well as, other alternative names as well.