Well, something I've learned over the last four years is that cute names age a lot faster than you'd think. So I'm generally in favor of descriptive ones instead, at least when we're dealing with command -line tools.
And unfortunately, "puppet doc" is pretty much the perfect name for it. :/ So, two things: 1. Can we consider renaming the old tool to puppet rdoc, as suggested earlier? It's always been janky; a rename might actually be a good signal to users that there's now something better. 2. If that's a no-go, we might want to use a temporary name for the new tool, one that shows it will eventually be called puppet doc. Maybe "puppet docplus" or something. Once we think we can get away with killing off the old-school puppet doc, I'd really like to reclaim its name for the improved tool. Anyway, if we can't use puppet doc: - puppet strings is all right, though I don't love it. (It's cute, but it's sort of domain-appropriate this time, so I could live with it.) - new suggestions: "puppet details" or "puppet codex." On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 10:33:04 AM UTC-7, Andy Parker wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Hailee Kenney <hai...@puppetlabs.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> >> puppet readme >> puppet guide >> puppet usage >> > > These three seem like they would be confused with "puppet help" too easily > > I have the same problem with these three. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puppet-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/2146c62c-b643-4330-85ae-665437a18c7b%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
