We are arguing with colleagues how to name a method:
Those who insist on the first name say that it is more generic, and does not reveal internal implementation. Furthermore, second name is really awkward.
The other half prefers the second name. Despite it is long (and ugly) it clearly states the expectation of the business. Processing is available only for instructions which status is
So, in essence, the dispute is about which kind of information should and should not be revealed be the names.
Contracts should be stable vs
Contracts should be continuously refactored to reflect domain.
Both approaches seem to be of equal importance.
What does DDD tell about this?