Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
Am Mittwoch, 7. August 2013, 12:00:57 schrieb William Hubbs: On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 11:26:16AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote: On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 10:09:54PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: I'm replying the start of this thread, rather than picking a single person to respond to. I DO want more brainstorming on ideas for the naming of the package, and I think people need to cast a wider net for naming ideas. Robin, I would like the decision to be made soon. I need to release OpenRc-0.12 in the next day or so, and if I do not have the answer I will have to do the split in OpenRc-0.13. I thought of a name based on your last suggestion and a comment on the list. Instead of networkrc, maybe netifrc (network interface rc). So, my choices, in no particular order, would be, netifrc, networkrc or, if neither of those fly, keep gentoo-oldnet. All, Robin hasn't responded, so my choice for this is netifrc (network interface rc). Someone made a comment about rc implying old school, RC means run control. I'm not sure an implication of old school is a big concern. Ich think it was me who was telling that. What I meant was that old school configuration file names are often called somethingrc which may imply that netifrc might be a configiration file for a tool called netif. -Marc -- 0x35A64134 - 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317 3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 11:26:16AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote: On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 10:09:54PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: I'm replying the start of this thread, rather than picking a single person to respond to. I DO want more brainstorming on ideas for the naming of the package, and I think people need to cast a wider net for naming ideas. Robin, I would like the decision to be made soon. I need to release OpenRc-0.12 in the next day or so, and if I do not have the answer I will have to do the split in OpenRc-0.13. I thought of a name based on your last suggestion and a comment on the list. Instead of networkrc, maybe netifrc (network interface rc). So, my choices, in no particular order, would be, netifrc, networkrc or, if neither of those fly, keep gentoo-oldnet. All, Robin hasn't responded, so my choice for this is netifrc (network interface rc). Someone made a comment about rc implying old school, RC means run control. I'm not sure an implication of old school is a big concern. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 12:00:57PM -0500, William Hubbs wrote: So, my choices, in no particular order, would be, netifrc, networkrc or, if neither of those fly, keep gentoo-oldnet. Robin hasn't responded, so my choice for this is netifrc (network interface rc). Someone made a comment about rc implying old school, RC means run control. I'm not sure an implication of old school is a big concern. Long live netifrc! (networkrc is already used) -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
Dnia 2013-08-07, o godz. 12:00:57 William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org napisał(a): On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 11:26:16AM -0500, William Hubbs wrote: On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 10:09:54PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: I'm replying the start of this thread, rather than picking a single person to respond to. I DO want more brainstorming on ideas for the naming of the package, and I think people need to cast a wider net for naming ideas. Robin, I would like the decision to be made soon. I need to release OpenRc-0.12 in the next day or so, and if I do not have the answer I will have to do the split in OpenRc-0.13. I thought of a name based on your last suggestion and a comment on the list. Instead of networkrc, maybe netifrc (network interface rc). So, my choices, in no particular order, would be, netifrc, networkrc or, if neither of those fly, keep gentoo-oldnet. Robin hasn't responded, so my choice for this is netifrc (network interface rc). Someone made a comment about rc implying old school, RC means run control. I'm not sure an implication of old school is a big concern. Well, it sounds totally like motif to me but that doesn't really matter :D. Though I'd cut it down to 'netif' unless that's taken. Without the 'rc' is more nicely pronounced. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 12:01:14AM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: Well, it sounds totally like motif to me but that doesn't really matter :D. Though I'd cut it down to 'netif' unless that's taken. Without the 'rc' is more nicely pronounced. netif is taken unfortunately, it's hard to differentiate in Google between: NETIF - Nepal Environment and Tourism Initiative Foundation netif.h in lwip net/if.h in the core POSIX/XNS specs. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 08/06/2013 12:09 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: Various proposed names (in no specific order): names, *sigh* It's rather a interface setup utility than a networking thing. Networkin happens - most cases - when you have paths and entities and such - so: genif - for GENtoo InterFace (relativley free on google) geco - GEntoo COnnect (taken by ammunition and multi-national) most penguin/cow related names are taken and dictionary words are taken. enp3s0 - just 4,380 hits gif - *trololo* - -- Michael Weber Gentoo Developer web: https://xmw.de/ mailto: Michael Weber x...@gentoo.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iF4EAREIAAYFAlIAlJ0ACgkQknrdDGLu8JB7RAD7BykNyuToczgom047oMvE2asl AzasM2xBNDjnIrM/9r0A/1C8KX79YaqpihgiyCJYOEcyEpRrJLscn639oCN55jdo =Eqvz -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On 06/08/2013 00:09, Robin H. Johnson wrote: I'm replying the start of this thread, rather than picking a single person to respond to. I DO want more brainstorming on ideas for the naming of the package, and I think people need to cast a wider net for naming ideas. I'm most certainly not planning to get rid of the package whatsoever, many of my systems have complex configurations that are made MUCH easier with oldnet than any other network configuration system I have found. Goals of gentoo-oldnet: - Make oldnet functionality available to users of other init systems [1][2] - If a package upstream is forcing you towards systemd, you shouldn't have to lose other very useful packages. - Seperate out development cycle from core OpenRC - oldnet accounts for more than 30% of OpenRC bugs, and a large fraction of the codebase. History of the oldnet name: - It's only called oldnet because when Roy introduced 'newnet', what we consider to be 'oldnet' didn't actually have a separate name. Various proposed names (in no specific order): - openrc-oldnet (implies OpenRC, and has 'old'). - openrc-gentoo-net (implies OpenRC) - gentoo-networking (does this mean newnet is here too?) - gen-net (ditto) - netrc (conflicts) - opennetrc (implies OpenRC) - 'net run control' (hard to search) - 'net run configuration' (hard to search) - multi-net (conflicts) - netctl (conflicts) - netcfg (conflicts) - netconf (conflicts) - enet (conflicts) - posixsh-netconf (conflicts netconf) - nettool (conflicts) - netcfgtool (conflicts) - posixnet (conflicts) - shnettool Naming goals: - Should describe what it does - Does NOT have a name conflict as verified by Google. - Does NOT imply OpenRC. - Implying Gentoo is fine, as it's where the package comes from. - Should drop 'old' I think we should focus on the first goal the most: oldnet is a network configuring tool in pure POSIX shell So we probably want the substring 'net' somewhere in there. Beyond that, all suggestions are welcome. [1] There was a failed GSOC project that I mentioned several years ago, that was to support ALL openrc style init.d scripts on Upstart, so oldnet would have worked implicitly. Unfortunately the student didn't actually do ANY work. [2] The configuration itself ends up broken into two parts: - directives that control the startup dependency tree. - directives that control the actual configuration. The former will need to be interoperable or exported to other init systems in some way (hopefully dynamically), the latter can stay the same. The software was originally called net, right? Perhaps not officially, but certainly colloquially. Why not just keep the name net and leave other newer systems to come up with their own names? I do agree that modifiers old and new are bad ideas - they come about because of the environment and no the software itself. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 05/08/13 09:45 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: On 08/05/2013 06:09 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: - netrc (conflicts) Would naming it net-rc alleviate the perceived conflict? Or alternatively, rc-net ? (google seems to reference 'rc' as 'remote control' as in race cars, airplanes, etc; but given /etc/rc.* and /etc/init* have been around forever and have always been called the rc system, i think we should be safe using it) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlIBDGkACgkQ2ugaI38ACPDXWQD/Y4LVerIupWiP3Z9smg/FEUIA 1mNGhvLXuWuel18PEdYA/iGoixmYUiO5h2AlDBf2gIepsa+3cMfHW1zS6MhaDmxT =n7pZ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 10:09:54PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: I'm replying the start of this thread, rather than picking a single person to respond to. I DO want more brainstorming on ideas for the naming of the package, and I think people need to cast a wider net for naming ideas. Robin, I would like the decision to be made soon. I need to release OpenRc-0.12 in the next day or so, and if I do not have the answer I will have to do the split in OpenRc-0.13. I thought of a name based on your last suggestion and a comment on the list. Instead of networkrc, maybe netifrc (network interface rc). So, my choices, in no particular order, would be, netifrc, networkrc or, if neither of those fly, keep gentoo-oldnet. If we change away from gentoo-oldnet, we will need to open an infrastructure bug to change the name of the overlay, the bugzilla account and the component in bugzilla before we can take bugs for the new package. Thoughts anyone? William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
Am Dienstag, 6. August 2013, 11:26:16 schrieb William Hubbs: On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 10:09:54PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: I'm replying the start of this thread, rather than picking a single person to respond to. I DO want more brainstorming on ideas for the naming of the package, and I think people need to cast a wider net for naming ideas. Robin, I would like the decision to be made soon. I need to release OpenRc-0.12 in the next day or so, and if I do not have the answer I will have to do the split in OpenRc-0.13. I thought of a name based on your last suggestion and a comment on the list. Instead of networkrc, maybe netifrc (network interface rc). So, my choices, in no particular order, would be, netifrc, networkrc or, if neither of those fly, keep gentoo-oldnet. If we change away from gentoo-oldnet, we will need to open an infrastructure bug to change the name of the overlay, the bugzilla account and the component in bugzilla before we can take bugs for the new package. Thoughts anyone? My 2¢: * Keep a simple but straight forward and technical name * Do not use *rc as this implies an oldschool configuration filename Some more suggestions: * openrc-net (if it is coupled to openrc) * rcnet * gentoo-networking * gentoo-netconf * netconf Or maybe * larry-net ;-) -Marc -- 0x35A64134 - 8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317 3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
[snip] :p I'm actually thinking netrc if Robin is ok with it. William replaying to a random message in the tree Not going to suggest a name but if has to be something for general consumption, it should avoid the gentoo inside the name just my 0.2¢
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
I'm replying the start of this thread, rather than picking a single person to respond to. I DO want more brainstorming on ideas for the naming of the package, and I think people need to cast a wider net for naming ideas. I'm most certainly not planning to get rid of the package whatsoever, many of my systems have complex configurations that are made MUCH easier with oldnet than any other network configuration system I have found. Goals of gentoo-oldnet: - Make oldnet functionality available to users of other init systems [1][2] - If a package upstream is forcing you towards systemd, you shouldn't have to lose other very useful packages. - Seperate out development cycle from core OpenRC - oldnet accounts for more than 30% of OpenRC bugs, and a large fraction of the codebase. History of the oldnet name: - It's only called oldnet because when Roy introduced 'newnet', what we consider to be 'oldnet' didn't actually have a separate name. Various proposed names (in no specific order): - openrc-oldnet (implies OpenRC, and has 'old'). - openrc-gentoo-net (implies OpenRC) - gentoo-networking (does this mean newnet is here too?) - gen-net (ditto) - netrc (conflicts) - opennetrc (implies OpenRC) - 'net run control' (hard to search) - 'net run configuration' (hard to search) - multi-net (conflicts) - netctl (conflicts) - netcfg (conflicts) - netconf (conflicts) - enet (conflicts) - posixsh-netconf (conflicts netconf) - nettool (conflicts) - netcfgtool (conflicts) - posixnet (conflicts) - shnettool Naming goals: - Should describe what it does - Does NOT have a name conflict as verified by Google. - Does NOT imply OpenRC. - Implying Gentoo is fine, as it's where the package comes from. - Should drop 'old' I think we should focus on the first goal the most: oldnet is a network configuring tool in pure POSIX shell So we probably want the substring 'net' somewhere in there. Beyond that, all suggestions are welcome. [1] There was a failed GSOC project that I mentioned several years ago, that was to support ALL openrc style init.d scripts on Upstart, so oldnet would have worked implicitly. Unfortunately the student didn't actually do ANY work. [2] The configuration itself ends up broken into two parts: - directives that control the startup dependency tree. - directives that control the actual configuration. The former will need to be interoperable or exported to other init systems in some way (hopefully dynamically), the latter can stay the same. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 22:09:54 + Robin H. Johnson robb...@gentoo.org wrote: Naming goals: - Should describe what it does - Does NOT have a name conflict as verified by Google. - Does NOT imply OpenRC. - Implying Gentoo is fine, as it's where the package comes from. - Should drop 'old' I think we should focus on the first goal the most: oldnet is a network configuring tool in pure POSIX shell So we probably want the substring 'net' somewhere in there. Beyond that, all suggestions are welcome. Here are a couple of suggestions: net-init (or netinit) - without the dash the only conflict appears to be a matlab script of some sort
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 08/06/2013 12:09 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: I'm replying the start of this thread, rather than picking a single person to respond to. I DO want more brainstorming on ideas for the naming of the package, and I think people need to cast a wider net for naming ideas. I'm most certainly not planning to get rid of the package whatsoever, many of my systems have complex configurations that are made MUCH easier with oldnet than any other network configuration system I have found. Goals of gentoo-oldnet: - Make oldnet functionality available to users of other init systems [1][2] - If a package upstream is forcing you towards systemd, you shouldn't have to lose other very useful packages. - Seperate out development cycle from core OpenRC - oldnet accounts for more than 30% of OpenRC bugs, and a large fraction of the codebase. History of the oldnet name: - It's only called oldnet because when Roy introduced 'newnet', what we consider to be 'oldnet' didn't actually have a separate name. Various proposed names (in no specific order): - openrc-oldnet (implies OpenRC, and has 'old'). - openrc-gentoo-net (implies OpenRC) - gentoo-networking (does this mean newnet is here too?) - gen-net (ditto) - netrc (conflicts) - opennetrc (implies OpenRC) - 'net run control' (hard to search) - 'net run configuration' (hard to search) - multi-net (conflicts) - netctl (conflicts) - netcfg (conflicts) - netconf (conflicts) - enet (conflicts) - posixsh-netconf (conflicts netconf) - nettool (conflicts) - netcfgtool (conflicts) - posixnet (conflicts) - shnettool Naming goals: - Should describe what it does - Does NOT have a name conflict as verified by Google. - Does NOT imply OpenRC. - Implying Gentoo is fine, as it's where the package comes from. - Should drop 'old' I think we should focus on the first goal the most: oldnet is a network configuring tool in pure POSIX shell So we probably want the substring 'net' somewhere in there. Beyond that, all suggestions are welcome. [1] There was a failed GSOC project that I mentioned several years ago, that was to support ALL openrc style init.d scripts on Upstart, so oldnet would have worked implicitly. Unfortunately the student didn't actually do ANY work. [2] The configuration itself ends up broken into two parts: - directives that control the startup dependency tree. - directives that control the actual configuration. The former will need to be interoperable or exported to other init systems in some way (hopefully dynamically), the latter can stay the same. Adding some proposals: - - altnetrc (as it is an alternative) - - galtnet (gentoo + alternative + network) - - altgnet (same, permuted) - - anetcfg (alternative + network + configuration) - - netposh (network + posix + shell) - - psnetconf (posix shell network configuration) - - maybe this one is inspirational, too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gannet Kind regards, Manuel -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJSACk5XxSAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci0uLi5Abm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ4MDA1RERERkM0ODM2QkE4MEY3NzY0N0M1 OEZCQTM2QzhEOUQ2MzVDAAoJEFj7o2yNnWNcW3MP/iu+n+SPJ50tfrfWyrONXj8v m5mABJtK8DkX/KVdOpr1YWKv3DJVB4Nx6iGSh4PW/jdkVeRmIOJLwipMX3aqpCGi T0dxQrmTwYyJ1+F6oF9UJiFAtTQ1jhNDlBcc/AqajPwWuMOKHGiHeyrROqnUakiA /BeZ02a28TMy+stwMaiKT/4DvoIQX/chi5CLdiPOk1uKxnhC7yfSZvh+WFcYh7SW iW3LQrPO+fiHLrKxr7GlFQ86RTg2A0ySjrpbBYhsYSePkDuRZkAQ8hB1wzDayvek p6zLgHh7qaFREndnSnWhK2Pk7IZ/FqF+MFodW0j6Wv3BTxf0CDoDiWvkIrrrAXfe w2YfzBgQfOtPmARQegWQn2PhsM+F9jPCvA0r2GrSm92i6F9pQ7sHGjniL1Wj4nwA H7YYkAK6Vh23NM49evTragrIWAPtNFKAtyrMVHhGcMYy9gXWKQW1HgxW6N4Mxmv7 OO3SkzS5FNU7rrwbL9thGoRwLifTj9jzLIi3Kb2xcyC2Cxl99JxYq1tgwXYYDkEM Kywqug/sAe5RXk2dfqrVspkOZzppsZYo5ffa7ddPZJGqSdKIqgOqn0TuDh/v1sWZ sUol5N0hr56KjG6a3oiHdjxbqj9CiWNGO5n6/AhUbEIccyg5Ug2TTamfMDYqnXPj DCIE9KqaYxIQA30CyTen =4zrW -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 10:09:54PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote Naming goals: - Should describe what it does - Does NOT have a name conflict as verified by Google. - Does NOT imply OpenRC. - Implying Gentoo is fine, as it's where the package comes from. - Should drop 'old' Some suggestions, keying in on the fact that it's shellscript-based - netshell or netshellrc - shellnet or shellnetrc - bashnet or bashnetrc - ashnet or ashnetrc Note that the rc suffix does not imply OpenRC, e.g... [i660][waltdnes][~] ll /etc/*rc -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1484 Jun 14 08:17 /etc/drirc -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1304 Jul 27 20:30 /etc/eixrc -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1855 Feb 14 2010 /etc/inputrc -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 125 May 13 09:27 /etc/mail.rc -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 8949 Jul 4 12:53 /etc/nanorc -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 77 Jun 14 04:11 /etc/procmailrc -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4479 Jun 14 02:54 /etc/wgetrc -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org I don't run desktop environments; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On 08/05/2013 06:09 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: - netrc (conflicts) Would naming it net-rc alleviate the perceived conflict?
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On 08/05/2013 09:45 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: On 08/05/2013 06:09 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: - netrc (conflicts) Would naming it net-rc alleviate the perceived conflict? Or, duh, networkrc.
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On 4 August 2013 10:38, Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 21:03 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? You and I have had this talk more times than I can remember at this point. Using the name oldnet sucks and was one of the worst choices possible. Looking through our IRC chats, I had also suggested gentoo-networking. How about gen-net? It's nice, short and the name is more flexible if the pkg is picked up by other distros (something bantied about during previous discussions). ++ -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
Doug and Brian, I'm going to reply in a little more detail. On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 07:38:04PM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote: On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 21:03 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? You and I have had this talk more times than I can remember at this point. Using the name oldnet sucks and was one of the worst choices possible. Looking through our IRC chats, I had also suggested gentoo-networking. I thought about gentoo-networking, but that sucks in a way too because it implies that everyone on gentoo should be using it. That's not quite right because we have at least five network stacks I can think of off the top of my head, and OpenRc upstream supports another. - OpenRc upstream supports newnet, which I have played with, and I believe people on Gentoo are using successfully. - what we have been calling the oldnet stack, which most gentoo users have been using. - dhcpcd in standalone mode. - wicd - NetworkManager - badvpn How about gen-net? It's nice, short and the name is more flexible if the pkg is picked up by other distros (something bantied about during previous discussions). Hmm, that is a little too cryptic maybe... Is gen Gentoo? General? Generic? If we lose that flexibility and configurability then just give up on OpenRC right now cause its dead because all interesting features are gone and it'll just become an inferior init system that needs to be replaced. ++ As I have said before, none of this is an attempt to kill or deprecate anything. It is just re-arranging things by moving the old gentoo network stack into its own package. There are no plans to stop you from using it if you want to use it. There is definitely nothing being said here about the state of OpenRc in general. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
Dnia 2013-08-04, o godz. 15:37:50 William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org napisał(a): Doug and Brian, I'm going to reply in a little more detail. How about gen-net? It's nice, short and the name is more flexible if the pkg is picked up by other distros (something bantied about during previous discussions). Hmm, that is a little too cryptic maybe... Is gen Gentoo? General? Generic? I think that's the goal. Like 'we know it's for Gentoo, but sounds like generic'. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 11:37 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: Doug and Brian, I'm going to reply in a little more detail. On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 07:38:04PM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote: On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 21:03 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? You and I have had this talk more times than I can remember at this point. Using the name oldnet sucks and was one of the worst choices possible. Looking through our IRC chats, I had also suggested gentoo-networking. I thought about gentoo-networking, but that sucks in a way too because it implies that everyone on gentoo should be using it. That's not quite right because we have at least five network stacks I can think of off the top of my head, and OpenRc upstream supports another. - OpenRc upstream supports newnet, which I have played with, and I believe people on Gentoo are using successfully. - what we have been calling the oldnet stack, which most gentoo users have been using. - dhcpcd in standalone mode. - wicd - NetworkManager - badvpn I do not understand... the 'old net' which is actually gentoo networking for years, are fully functional script to manage and create a lot of configurations, and one of the advantages we have at Gentoo over other distributions. The only reason why this is called old net is because Roy switched to *BSD. What you call new net requires vast knowledge in network tools usage and interaction, which makes life very difficult. Some examples I managed to document: http://alonbl.tropicalwikis.com/wiki/Gentoo/Firewall_Using_Firehol http://alonbl.tropicalwikis.com/wiki/Gentoo/OpenVPN_Server http://alonbl.tropicalwikis.com/wiki/Gentoo/OpenVPN_Non_Root http://alonbl.tropicalwikis.com/wiki/Gentoo/Vpnc_Non_Root http://alonbl.tropicalwikis.com/wiki/Gentoo/VM_Tap_Networking http://alonbl.tropicalwikis.com/wiki/Gentoo/PPP_Client http://alonbl.tropicalwikis.com/wiki/Gentoo/PPPoE_Client As I have said before, none of this is an attempt to kill or deprecate anything. It is just re-arranging things by moving the old gentoo network stack into its own package. There are no plans to stop you from using it if you want to use it. There is definitely nothing being said here about the state of OpenRc in general. From behind the words it indeed looks like there is a change coming. Alon
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/04/2013 04:37 PM, William Hubbs wrote: I thought about gentoo-networking, but that sucks in a way too because it implies that everyone on gentoo should be using it. ... How about gen-net? It's nice, short and the name is more flexible if the pkg is picked up by other distros (something bantied about during previous discussions). Hmm, that is a little too cryptic maybe... Is gen Gentoo? General? Generic? Since it was pulled out of openrc, the name netrc also suggests itself. As I have said before, none of this is an attempt to kill or deprecate anything. It is just re-arranging things by moving the old gentoo network stack into its own package. There are no plans to stop you from using it if you want to use it. There is definitely nothing being said here about the state of OpenRc in general. I admit when I first saw the name a few weeks ago I thought oh shit they're going to make me redo all of my network configs. Google cleared it up, but still. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJR/s9EAAoJEBxJck0inpOiCqIP/0b5+yJgrEsk3jLsaceiypdF 94fj1Kq+tFMSctI6Jw8N/2gECTuk8pcTZHLWR++9Co4I37OpxZ4IKAiI7gaznU4e aPNVKd24dXy5ajnnSjTlD0m/S1ppMPZk8g4vmK3beod10KVdNCSuEEMNMq4c5pO7 uBWb8kww8YrCU1VaoGo90YHD+LY+hTaBgQDa5hr/TEZforRc5KP3BuMZCB3ONAwm Nw+uOiCB8dM+B54qmAfx+AsBNbPRrDGZzFIat0eCAiTix6scGY6m5/h7j7ZkNRoK YkMRCDfS1z/UQgHw9YOdLqr3TyM8Lq7jmqiEL+mb+iM4JNHKCtNo2q3JXHIT/1Wi qF1vD4TjC8Qom6Fyxm6InyKREqt4GVFw2eUS+V7+SxumgPsqGZ9Utx5SGVL2/+4h qwc+xp9tD5OJ02dK6eCWF+Q3sS1RdgprZu0h05rmMw6vGNZ7AokbOymyuo5Xoxu1 M+PlFHTrg8ETjetI+dRe3FQ5nTLdqmUw0mPqcbtPfEe5KzVbyJHlz2L7PTYGhtug tapJz1RjrPBwDJRtn/JIULvbUQHKg1sZwOv6K0FmJzLchticAUfaF7Puk6MOQvno yufIpNHjt/IfGyYNlELSmuWPHaAbGBCR/IbW1hwnFBf+NRXS1SIpjye8Fx2Y/cxh wK1JnALTBINNyvwoCfJj =M2rV -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Dnia 2013-08-04, o godz. 18:01:40 Michael Orlitzky mich...@orlitzky.com napisał(a): -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/04/2013 04:37 PM, William Hubbs wrote: I thought about gentoo-networking, but that sucks in a way too because it implies that everyone on gentoo should be using it. ... How about gen-net? It's nice, short and the name is more flexible if the pkg is picked up by other distros (something bantied about during previous discussions). Hmm, that is a little too cryptic maybe... Is gen Gentoo? General? Generic? Since it was pulled out of openrc, the name netrc also suggests itself. 'net run control'? - -- Best regards, Michał Górny -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJR/teDXxSAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ1RUJGMjBGOTk2RkIzQzIyQ0M2RkNBNDBC QUJGMUQ1RkY4QzgxMTBBAAoJELq/HV/4yBEKrxoQAN91GDdW5NkSGnckg3Roh8pc 0fD2061Lj0RgKQntKvhV/Tx/LkTv52oHSXHTlEAakzjkeFi6cNEKJOC0APNNmeco IOBqBaSbqAcjVfpk/BbMsQ/zkk0eRuxBCvnF+0IqE9pjNNn8DPe19IDLABuErHG3 bSWm8dsyCvwmNvXvlkVKD1PYnLyJxhYvoEOHUIodLGueDd0b/s8FQf4IMccOe2lq mwOcqflHCjpCyVLt77oniuhUWqkXpEm9XHPUQufZ0xmCY30Vmv9trZsIFTJ1RN07 qaFD4cP5BlHpWNrqqjx8+3R0jckabVP34eQogmO1s5NSdAWKOXuP41Lb7y5TQlBE oHDcWcEY/qnoF6KB+4kXoejVltcVHho3u3XV1g4fc6xULuGN9cRRj6EjLUifaUdV gkX7NvO2h6wPYFb7I1N0q9MkN8FHp9JimFvHnxlPikKwM62xxs68dK0XRa5QZ+4V upacGKloSigltOmubbfggs0GQdZRxdtNAnIyCsKk/0t7ZEg+qqUOeUePMWdZpnzI bHpgpVLmK8ZGsxTfXsEiN76+O0fjW7uRt2kkA4c0UnGaztsZSg187Br/5ZuuQ1SC 0sTWalHwnM8sTyHyVuArux9E+NlqzOj1YFSUDJD7w1xdiG6Vxv4wuLEzPGxJTX2P NEk6ADQUDW7gmClQrHQO =tnpg -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 08/04/2013 06:36 PM, Michał Górny wrote: Since it was pulled out of openrc, the name netrc also suggests itself. 'net run control'? Sounds about right. We can say it's net run configuration if that's better politically. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJR/toJAAoJEBxJck0inpOib+IP/jY21p4k4FGB3PvV8l2x+seX RJRii0riobrN+Mg2ex1YsQxhJcFIPMlsmM0lUpxeb6paqJPgXXryNz4ACEh9BAnk qMOzdVO8U2Bdm5Tlaq+m0uzxsNrpRnmfu7E6V0duDaclTGwIX8g8fVAZDx0nwbeO lpcabi8eus2UKgtufn92MLAQB8eD7Wimv84pyPVOqDlriDuaqpmoHmRypanz63I2 iCvbsXOFF65z4bJByt1+pg5SOwx+KJox7AN/uptqyoK58NhpxB+AtTyT9A7+efYz saadV29FECjB8TBP87upbvZZ9J9OlxZ6uC+RoIxxpWPA+zyZao+exlsTPAcjA9bd vSWSBU78YWDuv6qXOkEfh6qW+DSz3/J67bjCfW60VtfrHOXw5/M5ttnta3uzDzdL DyPvNDo2d+Kj8blZwmYxhCzq+k91NyTz+10MJU0tIXFdK14OlRwothzgcojaXOfb ILeYpZnZTARk/pZtoZhbzRPoXLuBVzEFF1Uh1bcaAdAKS9FRfa+VJXhoHQpBkb4K GoP1I2y3JB0kTy4J0O9phKNGSeyvmUqD2S6R3AV3bYYbovr04IumMUVEppEMJ+ko EQxE2UuLFT8zxdwiNLw+DV7cjgbvRhI7DdKnUhb6Srpo0KDF/BylxAPVggKVwo8O q8pLLEDgjAz532vOy3yE =/j3g -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Maintainer decides (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet)
Am Sonntag, 4. August 2013, 22:37:50 schrieb William Hubbs: (...) Dear William, I think we have come to the point where we all realize that * any other name is better than oldnet * there are several possible new names * and (as frequently) decision by discussion does not really work. (This is now about the umpteenth discussion of the same annoyingly trivial topic.) So how about *you* as the primary maintainer just pick a name which you think is best and we then go with it? Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer (council, kde) dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Sun, 2013-08-04 at 15:37 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: Doug and Brian, I'm going to reply in a little more detail. On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 07:38:04PM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote: On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 21:03 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? How about gen-net? It's nice, short and the name is more flexible if the pkg is picked up by other distros (something bantied about during previous discussions). Hmm, that is a little too cryptic maybe... Is gen Gentoo? General? Generic? OK. that was the point like mgorny said. To keep Gentoo out of the name so it is more likely to be picked up by other distros due to it's ease of use and flexibility. Since it is so flexible and handle so many configurations... How about Multi-net? ;) (just one more for the fray...) And yes, as dilfridge said, William, Robin, PLEASE end the bikeshed and pick a decent name. Almost anything is better than having old in it. If we lose that flexibility and configurability then just give up on OpenRC right now cause its dead because all interesting features are gone and it'll just become an inferior init system that needs to be replaced. ++ As I have said before, none of this is an attempt to kill or deprecate anything. It is just re-arranging things by moving the old gentoo network stack into its own package. There are no plans to stop you from using it if you want to use it. There is definitely nothing being said here about the state of OpenRc in general. William hmm, re-reading that, I was off the way I ++'d it. I know there are no plans to drop support for it. What I was plus-ing was more the fact that with the oldnet naming, it is more and more likely for users to migrate away from it. After all, it's the old way as it's name suggests. With that happening, there will be less and less need for openrc. And openrc dieing a slow death. P.S. no need to expand further on this. It was just a clarification Long Live OpenRC!!! :D -- Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 06:54:33PM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote: On Sun, 2013-08-04 at 15:37 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: Doug and Brian, I'm going to reply in a little more detail. On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 07:38:04PM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote: On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 21:03 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? How about gen-net? It's nice, short and the name is more flexible if the pkg is picked up by other distros (something bantied about during previous discussions). Hmm, that is a little too cryptic maybe... Is gen Gentoo? General? Generic? OK. that was the point like mgorny said. To keep Gentoo out of the name so it is more likely to be picked up by other distros due to it's ease of use and flexibility. Since it is so flexible and handle so many configurations... How about Multi-net? ;) (just one more for the fray...) :p I'm actually thinking netrc if Robin is ok with it. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: Hi all, I'm splitting the thread because this is a separate subject. On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 12:59:56AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: I do understand why Roy refer this as oldnet... but why in Gentoo do we keep the term old? The functionality of these script is huge, and is better than most distros out there. Do we want keep users out of it? are we going to obsolete this huge work? If we don't I suggest to remove the 'old' implication, to something like openrc-gentoo-net. Actually the plan is to generalize it so that it works with other init systems. Right now it is very tightly integrated with OpenRc, but there is interest in changing that, so adding openrc to the name would be misleading eventually. OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? However, I do not understand how you can port it without changing the notations... or lowering features... example: rc_net_*_provide, rc_net_*_need, or the rc_config, rc_use, rc_net_*_provide=!net etc... Do you think systemd users can understand that /etc/conf.d/net is actually a shell script? I hope this is not going to be eliminated, as I use it a lot. Regards, Alon Bar-Lev.
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: Actually the plan is to generalize it so that it works with other init systems. Right now it is very tightly integrated with OpenRc, but there is interest in changing that, so adding openrc to the name would be misleading eventually. OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? I don't know about best-networking. ;-) One reason we are splitting it out also is so it can have its own development/release cycle; the oldnet stuff is responsible for about 1/3 of the bugs against OpenRc right now, and it is very difficult to test because of all of the possibilities. However, I do not understand how you can port it without changing the notations... or lowering features... example: rc_net_*_provide, rc_net_*_need, or the rc_config, rc_use, rc_net_*_provide=!net etc... Do you think systemd users can understand that /etc/conf.d/net is actually a shell script? I hope this is not going to be eliminated, as I use it a lot. Robin is going to do most of it I think; I'm not exactly sure what he has in mind. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: Actually the plan is to generalize it so that it works with other init systems. Right now it is very tightly integrated with OpenRc, but there is interest in changing that, so adding openrc to the name would be misleading eventually. OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? I don't know about best-networking. ;-) One reason we are splitting it out also is so it can have its own development/release cycle; the oldnet stuff is responsible for about 1/3 of the bugs against OpenRc right now, and it is very difficult to test because of all of the possibilities. You and I have had this talk more times than I can remember at this point. Using the name oldnet sucks and was one of the worst choices possible. Looking through our IRC chats, I had also suggested gentoo-networking. Its really a shame because this dependency based networking is really one of the real strengths of Gentoo and its really just being given the cold shoulder. Our dependency based init system was one of the reasons many people used Gentoo back in the day (besides the zomg its source its faster use -O6 crowd). In our discussions I've suggested trimming back the support in the networking scripts from all the various options (they support 4 DHCP clients for example) and slowly push these scripts to be installed by the package and maintained by the package maintainer (e.g. the pump script can be managed by the net-misc/pump maintainer and so on and so forth). Give them a name (systemd did by calling these snippets unit files) like OpenRC net snippets (Don't let me come up with names, I'm not good at that part, just ask my co-workers) and maintain an API for them. However, I do not understand how you can port it without changing the notations... or lowering features... example: rc_net_*_provide, rc_net_*_need, or the rc_config, rc_use, rc_net_*_provide=!net etc... Do you think systemd users can understand that /etc/conf.d/net is actually a shell script? I hope this is not going to be eliminated, as I use it a lot. Robin is going to do most of it I think; I'm not exactly sure what he has in mind. William If we lose that flexibility and configurability then just give up on OpenRC right now cause its dead because all interesting features are gone and it'll just become an inferior init system that needs to be replaced. -- Doug Goldstein
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 21:03 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? You and I have had this talk more times than I can remember at this point. Using the name oldnet sucks and was one of the worst choices possible. Looking through our IRC chats, I had also suggested gentoo-networking. How about gen-net? It's nice, short and the name is more flexible if the pkg is picked up by other distros (something bantied about during previous discussions). If we lose that flexibility and configurability then just give up on OpenRC right now cause its dead because all interesting features are gone and it'll just become an inferior init system that needs to be replaced. ++ -- Brian Dolbec dol...@gentoo.org signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] renaming gentoo-oldnet
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 09:03:06PM -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: Actually the plan is to generalize it so that it works with other init systems. Right now it is very tightly integrated with OpenRc, but there is interest in changing that, so adding openrc to the name would be misleading eventually. OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? I don't know about best-networking. ;-) One reason we are splitting it out also is so it can have its own development/release cycle; the oldnet stuff is responsible for about 1/3 of the bugs against OpenRc right now, and it is very difficult to test because of all of the possibilities. You and I have had this talk more times than I can remember at this point. Using the name oldnet sucks and was one of the worst choices possible. Looking through our IRC chats, I had also suggested gentoo-networking. Its really a shame because this dependency based networking is really one of the real strengths of Gentoo and its really just being given the cold shoulder. Our dependency based init system was one of the reasons many people used Gentoo back in the day (besides the zomg its source its faster use -O6 crowd). Nothing is being obsoleted; it is just being separated into its own package, per robbat2's request. I have no ideahow that translates into giving this system the cold shoulder.It just makes it possible for more development to happen easier with it. In our discussions I've suggested trimming back the support in the networking scripts from all the various options (they support 4 DHCP clients for example) and slowly push these scripts to be installed by the package and maintained by the package maintainer (e.g. the pump script can be managed by the net-misc/pump maintainer and so on and so forth). Give them a name (systemd did by calling these snippets unit files) like OpenRC net snippets (Don't let me come up with names, I'm not good at that part, just ask my co-workers) and maintain an API for them. How exactly is anything I've said stopping any of this from happening? William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
