perfsonar development work

[Roman Lapacz <>]

Nicolas Simar wrote:
> In Zagreb, Loukik reached an agreement for naming the services
> ps-mdm-.... Then as you know he left with the reasoning.
>   

Could you point me to the minutes of the session when this agreement was 
reached (who was involved in the discussion on this). I don't remember 
such agreement.

> It came back few months later, but at this time, there was no valid
> points in favor of it or not. Thus the current situation.
>
> But having seen how the installer work,
> - search for packages
> - consistency, you have the same naming convention, so you don't have to
> remember if it is a geant2 or ps-mdm or a development from a NREN.
>   

I believe the current naming convention 
(PROJECT/INSTITUTION_NAME-IMPL_LENG-SERVICE_TYPE) is more open, 
descriptive and flexible. Service developers/maintainers, please, 
provide your opinions.


Roman

> It make sense to have a single prefix and it will be ps-mdm, but for the
> next release, not for this one (time constrains).
>
> Gijs Molenaar wrote:
>   
> > Gijs Molenaar wrote:
> >     
> > > Nicolas Simar wrote:
> > >       
> > > > Yes it is.
> > > >         
> > > So why don't all the packages follow this convention yet? Or am I wrong?
> > >       
> > So? everybody is just going to ignore this question until there is a
> > major inconsistency at the release? interesting.
> >     
>
> What specific thread is there?
>
> Cheers,
>