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 understood without it being in the openstack
>>> context, then it can exist without the prefix.
>>
>> The point being that users of OpenStack at least know the names of the
>> services they install (ie: nova for Compute, Neutron for networking,
>> etc.). The fact that non-OpenStack users will probably not understand
>> what the package does without reading the description isn't really a
>> problem. As for the libs, even OpenStack users don't even need to bother
>> knowing what they are, as they will be installed thanks to dependencies,
>> so in fact, only the package maintainers care.
>
> 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 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 are, which makes it pointless (and in fact very
annoying) to prefix them with openstack-. I'd say it take at least a
month to understand all the interactions.
Now that there's the suite::openstack on all of these packages, it will
be a lot easier to search anyway. Also, I take a great care about the
short descriptions.
Cheers,
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Reply to: