On Fri, 24 Jun 2016 14:27:27 -0500
Adam Miller <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Kevin Fenzi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:28:43 -0400
> > Matthew Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> >  
> >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:32:39AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote:  
> >> > > Yeah, I think what we need is a "Fedora Docker" product.
> >> > > ie, at this level:
> >> > > Is "Fedora Docker" the right name for the product?  
> >> > I'm honestly not sure, I'd like to get mattdm and/or the Council
> >> > to chime in on that. I'm definitely not the right person for
> >> > selecting the color of the bike shed.  
> >>
> >> I was first thinking "Fedora Docker Layered Images" — it's longish
> >> but accurately descriptive. But then I thought: actually, we don't
> >> have a clear bug-reporting home for _base_ images (other than
> >> pagure for the fedora-kickstarts). So, if it isn't too ugly to
> >> overload the namespace just a little bit, we could just do "Fedora
> >> Docker Images".
> >>
> >> What do you all think?  
> >
> > Sure, works for me.  
> 
> Where do we need to submit the request for the new component to be
> created in BZ?

Just an infrastructure ticket. 

But we should also file the a pkgdb issue to update the bugzilla sync
script for components in that namespace. 

kevin

Attachment: pgpp7rM3b1K_l.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/[email protected]

Reply via email to