Re: [libvirt] [libvirt-jenkins-ci PATCH v2 2/6] guests: Introduce lcitool
On Thu, 2017-10-19 at 14:53 +0200, Pavel Hrdina wrote:
> So if your only argument against it is that you don't like
it very
> much, my reply is that I do like it quite a bit and, well, I get to
> name the programs I write :)
Well, yes and no :) you can name the program but you also need to have
an ACK from community to accept that name. "licito" is just a cool name
that doesn't tell you anything from the first glance what it is. On the
other hand lcitool tells you that it's some kind of tool and that the
"lci" part specifies what kind of tool it is. It's not only that I
don't personally like it but it also looks like some randomly chosen
name even though there is some pattern behind it.
I vote for lcitool instead of licito.
I don't feel like any of your arguments have much weight, since
for most applications the name only has a very vague correlation
with the functionality or intended purpose, if that: see mutt,
dnf, evince, firefox, ansible and so, so many more examples.
That said, point taken about the need for the community to stand
behind a name before it can be adopted.
Most importantly, I feel like we could both spend our time in a
more productive way than argue about this, so let's just stick
with the existing name unless someone comes up with a different
one that manages to make everyone happy.
--
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization