Rename "LockupLL" to "LockupLinear" and "LockupLT" to "LockupTranched"

[PaulRBerg]

It just dawned on me that there is a redundancy in the names of the following contracts (on the staging branch):

• SablierV2MerkleLockupLL
• SablierV2MerkleLockupLT

Some background on how we arrived at these names - the MerkleLockup contract used to be called MerkleStreamer. When "streamer" was part of the name, it made sense to append "LL" and "LT" to distinguish between the underlying distribution contracts. But now, it feels a bit redundant to me. How about we rename the contracts like so?

• SablierV2MerkleLL
• SablierV2MerkleLT

Or like so:

• SablierV2MerkleLockupLinear
• SablierV2MerkleLockupTranched

Cc @sablier-labs/solidity and @razgraf.

[razgraf]

Yup, it is repetitive. Flagged this a while back (see note (1)): #288 (comment)

[razgraf]

The long form I guess (2nd option)? That would follow the same structure as the names we use in v2-core i.e. SablierV2LockupTranched.

[andreivladbrg]

Long form works for me

[smol-ninja]

I like short form more but lets go with the majority.

[PaulRBerg]

I also like the short form more, which makes this a deuce. Rationale for short-term:

• We actually want to differentiate from V2 Core to avoid accidental confusion, e.g., a user seeing MerkleLockupLinear on Etherscan and thinking that this is a Core contract
• LockupLinear/ LockupTranched are technical distribution models anyway - users don't know about them, they only know about the models shown in the UI
• We might create distribution models with three or more words in the future

[andreivladbrg]

I am neutral - I vote for both

[PaulRBerg]

Opened an issue: #319