+1 for Foreman Proxy

IMHO the "Smart" word does not add any useful information to the reader.

On Wednesday, November 2, 2016 at 11:30:35 AM UTC+2, Tomas Strachota wrote:
>
> On 10/17/2016 03:26 PM, Greg Sutcliffe wrote: 
> > On 17 October 2016 at 14:12, Lukas Zapletal <[email protected] 
> <javascript:> 
> > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>>> wrote: 
> >> 
> >> > This appears more inconsistent than the current situation, as there 
> will 
> >> > now be three terms, differing between the UI names ("Foreman Smart 
> >> > Proxy"), API/module names ("smart proxy"), and package names 
> ("foreman 
> >> > proxy"). 
> >> 
> >> That's indeed a very true statement, I'll add that the new term aims to 
> >> be the glue between the other two. 
> > 
> > I think I agree with Dominic, a third standard to fix two other 
> > standards is a common mistake. 
> > 
> >> To be honest, I'd rather kill "Smart Proxy" than "Foreman Proxy" if I 
> >> had to choose just one. 
> > 
> > +1 to that, Foreman Proxy would be my choice. 
>
> +1 for Foreman Proxy 
>
> > 
> > Greg 
> > 
> > -- 
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> > Groups "foreman-dev" group. 
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
> > an email to [email protected] <javascript:> 
> > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>>. 
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. 
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to