On Thursday 03 February 2011 23:50:27 Paul Elliott wrote:
Why not use both names? Then one could use either name depending on the political context.
"open-buildservice for historical reasons also called opensuse-buildservice"
"opensuse-buildservice for marketing reasons also called open-buildservice"
There could be a virtual project so that people trying to install would always do the right thing no matter what named was used.
Hmmm, that would only complicate things. Kurt has a point, as does Bryen - we can call the technology Open Build Service and we have an instance wich is the openSUSE BS. Still I'd call it all the Open Build Service which has an instance free-to-use on build.opensuse.org - to make sure ppl realize that the instance on buid.o.o is ALSO cross-distro! If we point out that the Open Build Service is there 'for all distro's' but still say 'openSUSE build service' when referring to build.o.o we're still having the same issue. After all, while it's fine if ppl run their own instance of OBS, we have the biggest opportunity of turning them into contributors if they're on build.o.o!
So to cut to the chase and avoid further bikeshedding*, let me propose the following:
OBS will from now on officially be known as Open Build Service. build.openSUSE.org is openSUSE's OBS instance.
If any of the core OBS developers have strong objections, please say so. If not, let's say this decision is made - I don't really see why the whole project has to be involved in that decision. It's your build service, the marketing team advices a name change - you decide. Project gets notified. No reason to let another 500 people give their opinion (and bother the other 499 with that). Who codes decides, bottom up, independent teams, all that ;-)