1 |
On Sun, 2013-08-04 at 15:37 -0500, William Hubbs wrote: |
2 |
> Doug and Brian, I'm going to reply in a little more detail. |
3 |
> |
4 |
> On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 07:38:04PM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote: |
5 |
> > On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 21:03 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: |
6 |
> > > On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
7 |
> > > > On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: |
8 |
> > > >> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > > >> OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? |
11 |
> > > > |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> > How about gen-net? It's nice, short and the name is more flexible if |
14 |
> > the pkg is picked up by other distros (something bantied about during |
15 |
> > previous discussions). |
16 |
> |
17 |
> Hmm, that is a little too cryptic maybe... Is gen "Gentoo? General? |
18 |
> Generic?" |
19 |
|
20 |
|
21 |
OK. that was the point like mgorny said. To keep Gentoo out of the name |
22 |
so it is more likely to be picked up by other distros due to it's ease |
23 |
of use and flexibility. |
24 |
|
25 |
Since it is so flexible and handle so many configurations... |
26 |
|
27 |
How about Multi-net? ;) (just one more for the fray...) |
28 |
|
29 |
And yes, as dilfridge said, William, Robin, PLEASE end the bikeshed and |
30 |
pick a decent name. Almost anything is better than having "old" in it. |
31 |
|
32 |
|
33 |
> |
34 |
> > > If we lose that flexibility and configurability then just give up on |
35 |
> > > OpenRC right now cause its dead because all interesting features are |
36 |
> > > gone and it'll just become an inferior init system that needs to be |
37 |
> > > replaced. |
38 |
> > > |
39 |
> > |
40 |
> > ++ |
41 |
> |
42 |
> As I have said before, none of this is an attempt to kill or deprecate |
43 |
> anything. It is just re-arranging things by moving the old gentoo |
44 |
> network stack into its own package. There are no plans to stop you from |
45 |
> using it if you want to use it. There is definitely nothing being said |
46 |
> here about the state of OpenRc in general. |
47 |
> |
48 |
> William |
49 |
|
50 |
|
51 |
hmm, re-reading that, I was off the way I ++'d it. I know there are no |
52 |
plans to drop support for it. What I was plus-ing was more the fact |
53 |
that with the oldnet naming, it is more and more likely for users to |
54 |
migrate away from it. After all, it's the old way as it's name |
55 |
suggests. With that happening, there will be less and less need for |
56 |
openrc. And openrc dieing a slow death. |
57 |
|
58 |
P.S. no need to expand further on this. It was just a clarification |
59 |
|
60 |
Long Live OpenRC!!! :D |
61 |
-- |
62 |
Brian Dolbec <dolsen@g.o> |