Open Stack

On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Kyle Mestery <mestery at noironetworks.com>wrote:

> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 5:27 AM, James E. Blair <jeblair at openstack.org>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > With apologies to the specs repos we just created, the more I think
> > about this, the more I think that the right answer is that we should
> > stick with codenames for the spec repos.  The codenames are actually
> > more discoverable for potential contributors and collaborators.  If
> > you're looking for the place to submit a spec for swift-bench, you're
> > much more likely to find the 'swift-specs' repo than 'object-specs'.
> > And while some of our older programs have nice catchy names, the newer
> > ones can be a mouthful.  Here's a list of likely names based on the
> > program name:
> >
> > Program Names
> > -------------
> > compute-specs
> > object-specs
> > image-specs
> > identity-specs
> > dashboard-specs
> > networking-specs
> > volume-specs
> > telemetry-specs
> > orchestration-specs
> > database-specs
> > baremetal-specs
> > common-libraries-specs
> > infra-specs
> > docs-specs
> > qa-specs
> > deployment-specs
> > devstack-specs
> > release-management-specs
> > queue-specs
> > data-processing-specs
> > key-management-specs
> >
> > Note that "database-specs" is potentially quite confusing.
> >
> > And here's a list based on the program's codename:
> >
> > Codenames
> > ---------
> > nova-specs
> > swift-specs
> > glance-specs
> > keystone-specs
> > horizon-specs
> > neutron-specs
> > cinder-specs
> > ceilometer-specs
> > heat-specs
> > trove-specs
> > ironic-specs
> > oslo-specs
> > infra-specs
> > docs-specs
> > qa-specs
> > tripleo-specs
> > devstack-specs
> > release-management-specs
> > marconi-specs
> > sahara-specs
> > barbican-specs
>

+1 for project names

(Believe it or not, I think it's the correct answer here, see my line of
reasoning from this week's project meeting log

http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2014/project.2014-05-20-21.03.log.html
)


>  >
> > When I look at the two of those, I have to admit that it's the second
> > one I find more intuitive and I'm pretty sure I'll end up calling it
> > 'sahara-specs' in common usage no matter the name.
> >
> > -Jim
> >
> +1 from me. It's more obvious to use program names here.
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140523/7ccbee51/attachment.html>