| 1 |
On Sat, 2013-08-03 at 21:03 -0500, Doug Goldstein wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 7:30 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sun, Aug 04, 2013 at 01:49:46AM +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 1:38 AM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> >> OK... so gentoo-networking? or just come up with own name? best-networking? |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> You and I have had this talk more times than I can remember at this |
| 10 |
> point. Using the name "oldnet" sucks and was one of the worst choices |
| 11 |
> possible. Looking through our IRC chats, I had also suggested |
| 12 |
> gentoo-networking. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
How about gen-net? It's nice, short and the name is more flexible if |
| 16 |
the pkg is picked up by other distros (something bantied about during |
| 17 |
previous discussions). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> If we lose that flexibility and configurability then just give up on |
| 20 |
> OpenRC right now cause its dead because all interesting features are |
| 21 |
> gone and it'll just become an inferior init system that needs to be |
| 22 |
> replaced. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
++ |
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Brian Dolbec <dolsen@g.o> |
Archives