Re: OpenDaylight TSC] project names


David Meyer <dmm@...>
 



In discussing this with Phil he pointed out that we need to bring the developer tools admins into this conversation before we make any decisions. Basically we need to know what is possible with our tool chains. In particular, changing existing names and/or creating a naming paradigm that requires changes when a project changes state (e.g.,  bootstrap2core) may cause issues across the various tool chains.

Phil, who are the right people?

--dmm


On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@...> wrote:


From: David Meyer <dmm@...>
Date: Thursday, May 2, 2013 2:51 PM
To: "tsc@..." <tsc@...>
Subject: Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] OpenDaylight TSC] project names


Chris,

>> I've been meaning to bring this up for some time now...

>> 
>> I believe we should establish some guidelines on project names.
>> The current bootstrap projects have named themselves in ways
>> that are not appropriate and create confusion.

Thank you for raising this. I too have been thinking about this for some time now and came to similar conclusions.

>> The code under "controller" project is named "OpenDaylight Controller."
>> The code under "net-virt-platform" project is named "OpenDaylight SDN
>> Controller Platform."  While those projects may aspire towards those
>> names, they haven't, IMO, earned those names yet.
>> 
>> I suggest that names should be more like codenames (with appropriate
>> trademark vetting still done).
>> 
>> I suggest that the current names be changed to reflect the above
>> sentiment.
>> 
>> I suggest that the project lifecycle document be updated to take this
>> into account.  Perhaps as part of Graduation review, we'd allocate a
>> ODP-wide name that's no longer just the code name.
>> 
>> So, for example, we'd have proposal named HotSidewalk, which upon Graduation
>> (based on it's functionality) becomes OpenDaylight EggFryer.
>> 
>> Thoughts?

I agree. However,  this does suggest that we need a way to manage names, both initially and after Graduation. As you suggest this should likely be part of the lifecycle document. Others?

Agree. The names should perhaps indicate their status too (I.e.: bootstrap, etc…).  

We should also make sure that project names, and any internal object naming is stripped of any commercially named or licensed names to avoid the obvious issues. I think that is specified in the governing documents, but its ultimately up to the TSC to enforce this policy. 

--Tom



Join {TSC@lists.opendaylight.org to automatically receive all group messages.