On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:51 AM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:28:43 -0400 > Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:32:39AM -0500, Adam Miller wrote: >> > > Yeah, I think what we need is a "Fedora Docker" product. >> > > ie, at this level: >> > > Is "Fedora Docker" the right name for the product? >> > I'm honestly not sure, I'd like to get mattdm and/or the Council to >> > chime in on that. I'm definitely not the right person for selecting >> > the color of the bike shed. >> >> I was first thinking "Fedora Docker Layered Images" — it's longish but >> accurately descriptive. But then I thought: actually, we don't have a >> clear bug-reporting home for _base_ images (other than pagure for the >> fedora-kickstarts). So, if it isn't too ugly to overload the namespace >> just a little bit, we could just do "Fedora Docker Images". >> >> What do you all think? > > Sure, works for me. Where do we need to submit the request for the new component to be created in BZ? -AdamM > > kevin > > _______________________________________________ > infrastructure mailing list > infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
