On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Doug Hellmann <doug.hellm...@dreamhost.com>wrote:
> I'm thinking of the os prefix as standing for OpenStack, not Operating >> System. >> > > I would never have guessed that from the context. Why OpenStack instead of > Operating System? > We reserve this limited region of the namespace (openstack.org: or os:) for keys that we agree to have general meaning. In return for not using that prefix for their own purposes, anyone uploading images knows that there will no collisions, no matter what cloud that image lands on, and no matter what additional values openstack.org defines in the future. In general, I'd suggest that prefixing custom properties with your domain name is "a good idea" for the long term, but that's a separate issue. Sounds like you'd prefer openstack.org:version or openstack.org:os_version. Both work for me, I think I prefer the second. > Are the major and minor numbers going to be sufficient versioning > information? See for example PEP 386 for more detailed version strings ( > http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0386/). > For a distro, I believe yes. Do you have a counter-example? The package names may vary depending on the platform, so the names > probably shouldn't be tied to the names of the packages themselves but to > the projects. Or maybe that's just a taxonomy problem that should be left > up to the taggers. > Absolutely. The package name would be meaningful/comparable only after the distro/major/minor combo. I can't imagine any distro changing package names within a release. So we really do defer this issue to the distro.
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
