Open Stack

On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 5:01 AM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:

> On 06/13/2014 03:01 PM, Mathew R Odden wrote:
> > I am surprised this became a concern so quickly, but I do understand the
> > strangeness of installing a 'bash8' binary on command line. I'm fine
> > with renaming to 'bashate' or 'bash_tidy', but renames can take some
> > time to work through all the references.
> >
> > Apparently Sean and I both thought of the 'bashate' name independently
> > (from gpb => jeepyb) but I wasn't to keen on the idea since it isn't
> > very descriptive. 'bash-tidy' makes more sense but we can't use dashes
> > in python package names :(
> >
> > My vote would be for 'bashate' still, since  I think that would be the
> > easiest to transition to from the current name.
>
> -tidy programs typically rewrite your code (at least html-tidy and
> perl-tidy do), so I think that's definitely not a name we want, because
> we aren't doing that (or ever plan to do that).
>
> bashate ftw.
>

​I completely did not care at all until you suggested this!

+1 for bashate!!!​

>
> Because if you can't have an inside joke buried within your naming of an
> open source project, what's the point. :)
>
>         -Sean
>
> --
> Sean Dague
> http://dague.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140614/e7cf7f56/attachment.html>