> I like the “packages” + “package-manager” combo that Johanna suggests.
+1
Matthias
___
bro-dev mailing list
bro-dev@bro.org
http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
> On Jun 9, 2016, at 3:29 PM, Matthias Vallentin wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if I understand the -community suffix. The client bro-pkg
> makes sense to me. But the first association I have with
> bro-pkg-community is a community-version of bro-pkg (i.e., the client).
Was mostly thinking it’s nice t
On 9 Jun 2016, at 13:29, Matthias Vallentin wrote:
>> I see benefits in two separate repos:
>
> Yep.
>
>> client: bro-pkg
>> community packages: bro-pkg-community
>
> I'm not sure if I understand the -community suffix. The client bro-pkg
> makes sense to me. But the first association I h
> I see benefits in two separate repos:
Yep.
> client: bro-pkg
> community packages: bro-pkg-community
I'm not sure if I understand the -community suffix. The client bro-pkg
makes sense to me. But the first association I have with
bro-pkg-community is a community-version of bro-pkg (
> > Do you equate one package with one container, or does the plural
> > "packages" signify something more collection-ish?
>
> I see them as one to one.
Okay, that's what I was thinking as well.
Matthias
___
bro-dev mailing list
bro-dev@bro.org
htt
> On Jun 8, 2016, at 10:01 PM, Robin Sommer wrote:
>
> Do we maybe need need two repositories, one for the client and for the
> packages?
I see benefits in two separate repos:
1) pull requests easier to verify — there won’t be client bug fixes mixed in w/
package submission requests.
2) easi
> On Jun 8, 2016, at 5:32 PM, Matthias Vallentin wrote:
>
> One question though: what is the top-level container name?
package
> Do you equate
> one package with one container, or does the plural "packages" signify
> something more collection-ish?
I see them as one to one. e.g. a person subm