Tom Davis wrote: > I agree with Paul—something that only supports a couple providers probably > shouldn't be a top-level module.
I think Paul had the opposite opinion. Anyways, currently it's under 'resource.lb'. I don't think that it's _that_ important to spend a lot of time discussing this (as it sounds like a bikeshed color issue[1]). So I'd prefer to leave things as is unless somebody has a strong reason against that. > Also, I don't understand why it's called "lb"; it's completely > non-descriptive and not even a common acronym. What's the common acronym? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lb points to 'Load Balancing' in 'Science and Computing' section which makes me think that it's more or less common. I've though about other options. 'loadbalancers' is too long and too much to type. 'balance' (the verb, like 'compute') and 'balancing' (noun, like 'storage') doesn't give enough context to what we're balancing. Do you have an idea of a better name? 1: http://bikeshed.com/ Roman Bogorodskiy
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
