Re: Package naming rant

On Fri, 22 Apr 2016 10:47:03 +0200, Enrico wrote in message <20160422084703.ga24...@enricozini.org>: > I'm all for technical solutions to social problems. ..easy now, drones and gas chambers=$(technical solutions) to solve nazi etc hatred=$(social problems)? ;o) -- ..med vennlig hilsen =

Re: Package naming rant

Just think of that list is non-technical. Curiosa is fun-only :-) Le 23 avril 2016 12:04:13 GMT+02:00, Jakub Wilk a écrit : >* Holger Levsen , 2016-04-23, 09:53: >>>On a more general way, I'm really disappointed by this thread. > >Me too! Most of the

Re: Package naming rant

Thomas, On 23/04/2016 01:42, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 04/21/2016 10:47 PM, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: >> You can make a openstack-fuel-agent package and it will be clear that it >> is useless to people that do not know what openstack is. By making a >> package in a general namespace you are

Re: Package naming rant

* Holger Levsen , 2016-04-23, 09:53: On a more general way, I'm really disappointed by this thread. Me too! Most of the messages were scandalously serious! same here. "passive aggressive disguised as funny" is a bit too harsh as summary, but not much, IMO. We badly

Re: Package naming rant

On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 01:42:53AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On a more general way, I'm really disappointed by this thread. same here. "passive aggressive disguised as funny" is a bit too harsh as summary, but not much, IMO. > Guys, I don't appreciate this joke at all. Probably I should

Re: Package naming rant

Thomas, please don't take this personally. We appreciate your work. That is not in doubt. This more about making sure that we all take a step back when writing package names, short and long descriptions and think for a moment how to make this understandable for people that are new to the package,

Re: Package naming rant

On 04/21/2016 10:47 PM, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: > You can make a openstack-fuel-agent package and it will be clear that it > is useless to people that do not know what openstack is. By making a > package in a general namespace you are basically saying that this > package is useful to everyone, that

Re: Package naming rant

Thomas Goirand writes: > I'm ok with this discussion in principle, but it's going really too > far in this way. Let's be serious for 5 minutes please. Best to move it somewhere like ‘debian-devel’, then. IMO. -- \ “It ain't so much the things we don't know that get

Re: Package naming rant

On 04/21/2016 09:09 PM, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:00 PM Hubert Chathi > wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 16:53:50 +, Aigars Mahinovs > > said: > > > I don't

Re: Package naming rant

On 04/22/2016 10:47 AM, Enrico Zini wrote: > I do not know where openstack components install themselves; if they > install in /usr/bin stuff that is never meant to be run by the command > line, I think it would be more approriate to jump at the throat of > openstack upstreams rather than at that

Re: Package naming rant

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 09:57:45PM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Could we have this discussion in the OpenStack PKG list instead? It > doesn't feel like this list is the appropriate one. I also don't believe > that any of the people writing in this thread are OpenStack users, are > you guys? I

Re: Package naming rant

Le 21 avril 2016 23:23:49 GMT+02:00, Hubert Chathi a écrit : >On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 20:47:34 +, Aigars Mahinovs > said: > >> You can make a openstack-fuel-agent package and it will be clear that >> it is useless to people that do not know what openstack

Re: Package naming rant

]] Hubert Chathi > Not necessarily: "openstack-fuel-agent" (by itself) can just as easily > be understood (by someone who has no idea what OpenStack is) as "a fuel > agent named openstack", just like the "chromium-browser" package is > (was) "a browser called Chromium", or "ninja-build" is "a

Re: Package naming rant

On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 20:47:34 +, Aigars Mahinovs said: > You can make a openstack-fuel-agent package and it will be clear that > it is useless to people that do not know what openstack is. ... Not necessarily: "openstack-fuel-agent" (by itself) can just as easily be

Re: Package naming rant

On Thu, 21 Apr 2016, 21:58 Thomas Goirand, wrote: > Could we have this discussion in the OpenStack PKG list instead? It > doesn't feel like this list is the appropriate one. I also don't believe > that any of the people writing in this thread are OpenStack users, are > you guys?

Re: Package naming rant

On 04/21/2016 08:08 PM, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > Thomas Goirand dijo [Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 06:46:47PM +0200]: >> In the general case, I'd agree. But we're not talking about "a package" >> here, but about a complete *suite* of a complex cloud system. >> >> The argument is that you can't use OpenStack

Re: Package naming rant

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 9:00 PM Hubert Chathi wrote: > On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 16:53:50 +, Aigars Mahinovs > said: > > > I don't want to use OpenStack. I want to find a fuel logging > > application to keep track of the expenses in my car. I search packages

Re: Package naming rant

On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 16:53:50 +, Aigars Mahinovs said: > I don't want to use OpenStack. I want to find a fuel logging > application to keep track of the expenses in my car. I search packages > for "fuel" and find Fuel. So I install it. ... First of all, I don't see a

Re: Package naming rant

Thomas Goirand dijo [Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 06:46:47PM +0200]: > In the general case, I'd agree. But we're not talking about "a package" > here, but about a complete *suite* of a complex cloud system. > > The argument is that you can't use OpenStack without at least learning > what the components

Re: Package naming rant

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 6:47 PM Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 04/21/2016 05:27 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: > > This argument seems to suppose that no-one unfamiliar with a package > > ever reads its name. This is an astonishing assumption. > > In the general case, I'd agree. But we're

Re: Package naming rant

On 04/21/2016 05:27 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: > Thomas Goirand writes ("Re: Package naming rant"): >> On 04/18/2016 11:43 AM, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: >>> There could be a simple rule of thumb - if the name of the package makes >>> sense and is correctly underst

Re: Package naming rant

Thomas Goirand writes ("Re: Package naming rant"): > On 04/18/2016 11:43 AM, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: > > There could be a simple rule of thumb - if the name of the package makes > > sense and is correctly understood without it being in the openstack > > context, then

Re: Package naming rant

On 04/20/2016 07:54 PM, Enrico Zini wrote: > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:26:26AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: > >> Moving forward, what I would like to see is an easy to use shell tool to >> do what's needed. For example, something like this: >> >> debtags -kAC6B43FE -p python-shotgun \ >> -t

Re: Package naming rant

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:26:26AM +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Moving forward, what I would like to see is an easy to use shell tool to > do what's needed. For example, something like this: > > debtags -kAC6B43FE -p python-shotgun \ > -t

Re: Package naming rant

On 04/18/2016 11:43 AM, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:27 AM Thomas Goirand > wrote: > > Now, about the naming itself, let me give my opinion. > > I could have pre-fixed all packages with "openstack-" like they did in >

Re: Package naming rant

On 2016-04-18 at 11:26:26 +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote: > I could have pre-fixed all packages with "openstack-" like they did in > RDO/Red Hat, but this has proven to be really not convenient at all for > OpenStack users, with for example, names like this one: > [...] > Adding an "openstack-"

Re: Package naming rant

Thomas Goirand wrote: > Enrico Zini wrote: >> That wins the second place in my personal "let's spam the package >> namespace with meaningless names" rank. > > None of the names are meaningless. I could provide explanations for each > and every one of them (though probably nobody in this list

Re: Package naming rant

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:27 AM Thomas Goirand wrote: > Now, about the naming itself, let me give my opinion. > > I could have pre-fixed all packages with "openstack-" like they did in > RDO/Red Hat, but this has proven to be really not convenient at all for > OpenStack users,

Re: Package naming rant

Hi Enrico, Thanks for, via IRC, pointing me to your post, and for your message itself. On 04/17/2016 03:43 PM, Enrico Zini wrote: > Then, OpenStack packages. Which of these are actual openstack things? > >Oslo, Tataouine, Magnum, Rump, Keystone, Mistral, Glance, Sahara, >

Package naming rant

Hello, a couple of days ago I wrote some code that, following the established naming practices of the project I was working on, ended up looking quite surreal: /// Format a db::Format value to a string std::string format_format(Format format); ... fprintf(out, "Format: %s\n",