Excerpts from Nick Coghlan's message of 2013-01-16 12:15:15 +1000: > On 01/16/2013 12:01 PM, Dan Callaghan wrote: > > Right so this is purely a naming debate. But I think the name should not > > be "Beah execution environment" but rather "RHTS-compatible execution > > environment" or "execution environment for RHTS-format(ted) tasks" or > > something like that. Reasons: > > > > - All the commands are called rhts-* > > - Beah doesn't define anything itself, it just emulates RHTS > > - RHTS predates Beaker and Beah > > > > I see beah's existence as purely an implementation detail of supporting > > RHTS-formatted tasks (or an "RHTS-compatible execution environment") in > > Beaker. Some theoretical alternative/future harness might also support > > RHTS-formatted tasks, without having anything in common with Beah. > > Ah, OK - I had misunderstood which layers were emulating what in the > current setup. I think given that, it's best to just drop that part of > the blurb until we have a good description of the test environment in > the docs to link to. Once we have a suitable link destination for > "RHTS-compatible", then something like "Beaker currently runs all tasks > in an RHTS-compatible execution environment." may work.
+1 -- Dan Callaghan <dcall...@redhat.com> Software Engineer, Infrastructure Engineering and Development Red Hat, Inc.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Beaker-devel mailing list Beaker-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/beaker-devel
