On 22/12/2016 09:58, David Lang wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote:
>
>> On 22/12/2016 09:42, David Lang wrote:
>>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer,
>>>>> but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some
>>>>> point the fact that a name is known matters far more than the
>>>>> historical
>>>>> reasons for the name.
>>>>
>>>> a problem that can be solved by a http redirect ...
>>>
>>> Is that going to break all links in discussions that point at OpenWRT
>>> docs and/or forum threads?
>>>
>>> That's a high cost.
>>>
>>> David Lang
>>
>> it is something worth considering if the alternative content is
>> available and easy to look up and if we keep archives in ro mode of
>> existing content.
>>
>> claiming that there is only one option and no alternatives is just not
>> constructive and wont lead to a broad discussion during which we can
>> find a consensus.
>
> sorry, I did not mean to imply there is only one option.
>
> I think there is a lot of value in the OpenWRT name and all the links
> around the web that refer to it. So there is a huge cost to going with a
> different name.
>
> IMHO, this makes it an easy decision to make, but not the only one
> possible.
well i think you are just not considering options properly but simply
claiming that this is the easy road to take so lets take it. i find your
mail to be the contrary of something that can be used to start a broad
discussion which will hopefully lead to a consensus.
John
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
