On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:16 AM, James E. Blair <[email protected]> wrote: > Thierry Carrez <[email protected]> writes: > >> James E. Blair wrote: >>> openstack/oslo-specs -> openstack/common-libraries-specs >> >> I understand (and agree with) the idea that -specs repositories should >> be per-program. >> >> That said, you could argue that "oslo" is a shorthand for "common >> libraries" and is the code name for the *program* (rather than bound to >> any specific project). Same way "infra" is shorthand for >> "infrastructure". So I'm not 100% convinced this one is necessary... > > "data-processing-specs" has been pointed out as a similarly awkward > name. According to the programs.yaml file, each program does have a > codename, and the compute program's codename is 'nova'. I suppose we > could have said the repos are per-program though using the program's > codename. But that doesn't actually help someone who wants to write a > swift-bench spec know that it should go in the swift-specs repo. > > I'm happy to drop oslo from the rename list if Doug wants to mull this > over a bit more. The only thing I hate more than renaming repos is > renaming repos twice. I'm hoping we can have some kind of consistency, > though. People are in quite a hurry to have these created (we made 5 > more for official openstack programs yesterday, plus a handful for > stackforge).
I don't feel strongly, and am prepared to go along with the consensus on using the longer names. Doug > > -Jim > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
