brooklyn-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Moss <robert.m...@cloudsoftcorp.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Create repo for new deliverable: CLI
Date Thu, 26 Nov 2015 09:39:27 GMT
I'm tempted to suggest `brooklyn-go-client`. What happens to the existing
Java client, which is not a CLI?  Does it deserve its own repo too?  What
about future language clients?

On 26 November 2015 at 09:31, Aled Sage <aled.sage@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
>
>
> On 25/11/2015 17:55, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
>
>> There are two parts for this vote, one the creation of a *separate* repo,
>> second the *name* of the repo. The name of the repo matters less than the
>> name of the delivered artifact and I agree that brooklyn-client is slightly
>> more expressive than cli.
>>
>> +1 on the change. Agree we don't need another vote, unless the change
>> will create contention, which is not likely imho, given the nature of the
>> amendment.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Hadrian
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/25/2015 12:37 PM, Alex Heneveld wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Changing vote:
>>>
>>>      +1 brooklyn-client
>>>
>>> If you've voted and you like this please consider changing!
>>>
>>> I know there are other types of clients (jsgui, stubs) but there are
>>> other CLI's also (e.g. server-cli).  brooklyn-client-cli would be
>>> possible, but I think the CLI is what we want to emphasise, and in the
>>> interest of simplicity the following feels pretty good and has a nice
>>> symmetry:
>>>
>>> * brooklyn-server
>>> * brooklyn-client
>>> * brooklyn-ui
>>>
>>> (Detailed updated discuss and vote for repos to follow.)
>>>
>>> Best
>>> Alex
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24/11/2015 15:00, Andrea Turli wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 brooklyn-cli
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 at 15:59 David Lloyd <david.lloyd@cloudsoftcorp.com
>>>> >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +1 brooklyn-cli
>>>>>
>>>>> On 24 November 2015 at 14:05, Mark McKenna
>>>>> <mark.mckenna@cloudsoftcorp.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +1: brooklyn-cli
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 at 14:04 Aled Sage <aled.sage@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1: brooklyn-cli
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 24/11/2015 13:59, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Brooklyners,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Given the feedback on the [HEADS-UP] thread to David and
Geoff's
>>>>>>>> proposal, I move to starting a vote for the creation of a
separate
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> git
>>>>>
>>>>>> repo: brooklyn-cli. Tthe vote is both for the creation of the repo,
>>>>>>>> and its name. The name with the largest number of vote wins,
unless
>>>>>>>> strong objections will send us back to the drawing board.
This vote
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>
>>>>>> *not* for the name of the executable (br or bk).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [+1] brooklyn-cli (create repo with this name: a heneveld
proposal)
>>>>>>>> [+1] brooklyn-commons-cli (create repo with this name: mzaccardo
>>>>>>>> proposal)
>>>>>>>> [-1] we do not need a separate repo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please cast your vote. The vote is open for 72+ hours.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Mark McKenna*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Twitter :: @m4rkmckenna <https://twitter.com/m4rkmckenna>*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *PGP :: public-key
>>>>>> <https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x2B5DC759B1EB76A7>*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message