On 04/19/2013 11:05 AM, Tomas Sedovic wrote:
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?
No, the ruby client and basically everything we have in 'core'
repository will stay there. The other libs, like python or java could be
probably 'extracted' and then can live in GitHub organization if that is
more convenient for contributors.
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.
--
Michal Fojtik <[email protected]>
Deltacloud API, CloudForms
