On 04/19/2013 08:57 AM, Michal Fojtik wrote:
On 04/18/2013 09:51 PM, Joseph VLcek wrote:
Tomas, thanks for this sum up, I tried to think more about all this and
I agree with Joe as result ;-)
I think we can have 'deltacloud' in repo name, for all reasons you
pointed out. Since we haven't made any official announcement to mailing
list yes (just the community call), I think there is still some time to
change the name. Also changing name, will not destroy the history for
the project (closed pull requests, etc..)
But as Joe mentioned, I would prefer deltacloud-core for various reason.
One reason is that 'deltacloud' organization on Github could be an
umbrella for the upcoming 'deltacloud-lib' (and other demo-ware/projects
(deltacloud-workers, etc...)), so I think instead of just 'deltacloud',
we should call it 'deltacloud-core' (which is the official gem name
anyway...).
So +1 to rename, but I would prefer 'deltacloud-core' as the new name.
Sounds good to me.
Does that mean the ruby client library will split off to its own
codebase? What about the other libs in deltacloud/clients?
PS: We can still keep 'core' repo that will link to 'deltacloud-core',
so if somebody watch the community call, he will be pointed out to the
'right' repository.
-- Michal
I'm not in favor of renaming the repo but Thomas does make a few good
points
so if the decision is made to change the name then it would be OK with
me.
The one thing I would ask is that the name not be
deltacloud/deltacloud but instead
deltacloud/deltacloud-core, or something of the like, to aid in
distinguishing it from
the apache/deltacloud repo.
Just my 2 cents.
Joe V.
