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 <uhoreg@debian.org
> <mailto:uhoreg@debian.org>> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Apr 2016 16:53:50 +0000, Aigars Mahinovs
> <aigarius@gmail.com <mailto:aigarius@gmail.com>> 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 package that's simply named "fuel", but...
>
>
> fuel-agent
> fuel image based provisioning agent
>
> Ok, so it lets me to take pictures of my fuel bills and then does
> somethinng to provision me with more fuel? Sure!
>
> OpenStack is not in the long description even.
Correct, because fuel-agent is only far related to OpenStack. It just
provision bare-metal machines with an operating system, so it could be
used for the deployment of another thing than just OpenStack, which by
the way, may happen one day with Fuel.
Now, with this in the long description:
Fuel provides PXE booting to all of the bare metal servers it manages.
do you still believe it has something to do with gaz mileage?
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.
On 04/22/2016 02:53 PM, Hubert Chathi wrote:
> For sure it would be an
> improvement to mention OpenStack at least in the long description
Not in this case, no.
Cheers,
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Reply to: