3:29 a.m.
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Gerard Braad <me(a)gbraad.nl> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Lalatendu Mohanty <lmohanty(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Hardy Ferentschik <hardy(a)ferentschik.de>
> wrote:
>>
>> any more strong feelings regarding 'addons' vs 'add-ons'
regarding the
>> repo name?
>>
>
> I would suggest we append "minishift" to the repo name because when an
> user clones the repo the local directory name would be better if it is
> minishift-addons as compared to add-ons or addons.
>
I believe this is up to the user. I have many repository renamed by hand,
to create some order, and if the name is in use already they get an
alternative name (suffixed with -1 IIRC) . For instance, docker/machine is
also a very generic term, or expressjs/express. I think minishift/addons is
clear enough.
I disagree because machine is a go project. So contributors need to keep
it in docker/machine but for a non go project I do not think we can apply
the same logic. Also add-ons is a very generic name and it might be
confusing to me if I have lot of directories.
Although, as I mentioned I'd rather see 'contrib' as it indicates that
people can propose addons and other material which serve or help
with
minishift. Pretty much as what is done for many of the ansible repos we
have.
Renaming a repository is not something you should think lightly
about
(rather don't do).
+1.