On Sat, 2014-10-04 at 12:46 -0400, Mike Pinkerton wrote: > On 3 Oct 2014, at 19:37, Ray Strode wrote: > > > I'm not sure it's worth repainting the bikeshed at this point, but > > during the alluded-to discussion a few alternative names came up that > > would have been better than fedora-release-standard: > > > > 1) fedora-release-nonstandard > > 2) fedora-release-custom > > 3) fedora-release-diy > > 4) fedora-release-noncompliant > > The "nonstandard" and "noncompliant" names seem a bit pejorative. > > However, fedora-release-custom and fedora-release-diy (do-it- > yourself) and fedora-release-pyop (pick-your-own-packageset) and > fedora-release-byob (bring-your-own-blueprint) all have similar > meanings to this US-English speaker, and all seem like reasonable > choices, although the last three might require a parenthetical > explanation for some folk. Rehashing the conversation elsewhere, the problem with DIY and similar is that it doesn't make much sense in the context of Spins, which are non-productized but not particularly do-it-yourself. Perhaps we should have just gone with 'fedora-release-nonproduct' like I originally suggested months ago... Anyway, I don't really care what we pick, so long as it's decided in the next 24 hours so we can deal with the Obsoletes hoops and make sure it gets pushed out and into a test compose.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
