openstack team mailing list archive

["MARGOLIN, Udi (Udi)" <udi.margolin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Since networks are moving quite rapidly, can be quite messy and its pretty
cold out there my suggestion is:

"Blizzard"

-Udi

-----Original Message-----
From: Openstack
[mailto:openstack-bounces+udi.margolin=alcatel-lucent.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
t] On Behalf Of Thierry Carrez
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 12:47 PM
To: openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Openstack] New code name for networks

Anne Gentle wrote:
> > I told Monty and the TC this at the Summit (sorry I couldn't attend 
> > the session about code names).
> 
>     I promise, it wasn't the world's most fun session. :)
> 
> I'm sure. :) I think I don't have much regret but do feel sorry that I 
> don't know more.

The Etherpad is here:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/ProjectsReNaming

I think there is much more value to codenames than just "avoiding the cost
of a rename when the project becomes OpenStack". This was captured in the
session:

Codenames drawbacks and benefits
(-) Lack of trademark protection
(-) Confusing to newcomers
(-) Shadow their more official counterparts
(+) Short names are highly-convenient and efficient, often less ambiguous
(in conversations, executables,  modules...)
(+) Help building project and team identity
(+) Separate the project itself from its functional scope (so they remain
valid even if that scope evolves)

Those last two bits are pretty essential. There is a reason why a functional
description cannot be used as a project name. The project (as in, the code
repository and the community of contributors around it) is
*distinct* from the functional scope of what its code does.

Take Ceilometer ("OpenStack Metering"). What happens when they grow to cover
Monitoring ? You rename the project to "OpenStack Metering and Monitoring" ?
Or you keep the partial functional description ? I'd rather avoid to rename
everything every time a project evolves. Those renames are *extremely*
costly, as we'll soon enough realize.

I find the "confusing" argument pretty weak myself. Brands are used
everywhere, so we are used to make the translation between a name and a
function. Microsoft named its desktop environment "Windows", rather than
"Operating system" or "Desktop environment", and it took people about 5
minutes to get used to it.

> Go with kumquat, but don't call the CLI kumquat. Call your team kumquat
and your repo kumquat. 

If you call the CLI "os-metering", you'll have to rename it when the scope
expands, or live with a name that looks like a functional description but is
not an accurate one. I very much prefer to call it "ceilometer".

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
Release Manager, OpenStack

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature