> On Jun 1, 2016, at 5:56 AM, Dmitry Tantsur <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 06/01/2016 02:20 PM, Jason Guiditta wrote: >> On 01/06/16 18:49 +0800, Xingchao Yu wrote: >>> Hi, everyone: >>> >>> Do we need to give a abbreviation for PuppetOpenstack project? B/C >>> it's really a long words when I introduce this project to people or >>> writng article about it. >>> >>> How about POM(PuppetOpenstack Modules) or POP(PuppetOpenstack >>> Project) ? >>> >>> I would like +1 for POM. >>> Just an idea, please feel free to give your comment :D >>> Xingchao Yu >> >> For rdo and osp, we package it as 'openstack-puppet-modules', or OPM >> for short. > > I definitely love POM as it reminds me of pomeranians :) but I agree that OPM > will probably be easier recognizable.
The project's official name is in fact "Puppet OpenStack" so OPM would be kinda confusing. I'd put my vote on POP because it is closer to the actual definition of an acronym[1], which I generally find easier to remember over all when it comes to the shortening of long phrases. [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/acronym -- Cody
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
