Revisit descriptions of the various libraries we have

[RobPasMue]

As pointed out in the dev meeting, we should revisit the descriptions for our various packages and move from "Pythonic interface" to "Python client library" or "Python library" in most cases. Pinging @ansys/pyansys-core in case anybody wants to take the lead on the proposal

[moe-ad]

@RobPasMue just curious to know what the scope of this will be.
Are we just going to do something like creating a hook that checks for the occurrence of that term in a project's documentation and/or source code, and mandate projects to adopt it. And then leave it to the respective projects to replace occurrences of that term?

[RobPasMue]

I wanted to keep it simple honestly. The goal was to adapt the metapackage only, which is the entry point for most users. Each library should be responsible of adapting their stuff IMO. If they want to keep the "Pythonic interface" term, maintainers should be the one calling the shots in their respective libraries. Creating a tool for search&replacing has very low ROI. I would just do the search and replace myself.

[MaxJPRey]

Yes, this task can and should remain manual as it is limited.

[germa89]

I just updated PyMAPDL.

See description: https://github.com/ansys/pymapdl and ansys/pymapdl#3797

[RobPasMue]

Do you want to submit the change to this repo too @germa89 ?

[germa89]

Done! #882