On Fri, 12 May 2017, Daniel Golle wrote:
Hi Edwin,
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:02:36AM +0200, Edwin van Drunen wrote:
As a long time user of OpenWRT and recent “LEDE convert” I would also like to
chime in on the naming and branding of the post-merge project.
My employer and several of my industrial clients have used OpenWRT/LEDE
extensively over the past few years in many projects, ranging from routers and
access points to embedded servers and industrial controllers.
It was the small footprint combined with the versatility of the platform that
made it work and the availability of generic pre-built images for many
platforms and documentation that made it a success.
But despite the great track record of the system, there was always a bit of a
“hobbyist” feel that the OpenWRT name brought with it and a sense of
unprofessionalism being perceived by management and some end users.
Most likely this is because the name OpenWRT is strongly related to “hacking"
consumer routers (WRT54GL etc.) and the 90’s style website also didn’t help.
When LEDE was forked and presented as a more multi-purpose embedded linux, came
with new releases quickly and with a more modern website and interface to code
and documentation, the switch was easily made.
Not having WRT in the name, implying it would be for wireless routers, but
instead using the broad term “development environment” was helping to better
describe what the platform is and give it a more professional sound.
With the new name the platform was now seen as a professional piece of
infrastructure.
This quite matches the experience I've made when presenting the LEDE
fork...
In my opinion LEDE perfectly describes the combination of OpenWRT’s version of
the buildroot system, the set of patches and the Luci interface:
The entire development environment that is needed to build a generic bootable
image and software packages from source for almost any platform, with matching
pre-built SDK’s and image builders.
OpenWRT better describes the wide range of specific system images built for COTS
products (which are mostly wireless routers) and is a more suitable name for a final
“product".
You should consider maintaining the LEDE name or somehow differentiatie between the
“development environment” and the "final product".
I strongly agree here as well, I believe the "LEDE" project could
release an "OpenWrt" product in reasonable time intervals and that
should be targetting home routers and similar embedded systems.
I'm pretty sure the ship has sailed on that approach, being rejected by the
current openwrt devs last year.
remember that a vote has been held already on the naming scheme. There was near
universal agreement that a remerge should happen, and a slight majority that the
result should be named openwrt. it doesn't do anyone any good to keep arguing
points that have been agreed on.
David Lang
_______________________________________________
Lede-dev mailing list
Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
