Paul Crowley wrote: > To: [email protected] This went to the BTS, but you'd need to CC me (directly or as [email protected]) to be sure it reaches my inbox - fortunately I also scan the BTS via other means.
> mercurial-server doesn't provide a server binary, as you say. Instead > it adds a service to what the SSH daemon provides. I don't think I can > go with the wording you propose, because the service is available as > soon as mercurial-server is installed, which isn't what "toolkit" would > suggest - to me, a "toolkit" is inert until you use the tools to do > something. How about something like this? > > mercurial-server - shared Mercurial repository service I did consider suggesting the option of calling it a "framework", but if the above makes the most sense it'll do perfectly. -- JBR Ankh kak! (Ancient Egyptian blessing) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
