Re: [atomic-devel] Moving osbs/atomic-reactor under projectatomic org on Github

[Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan gmail com>]

On 7 July 2015 at 23:04, Lalatendu Mohanty <lmohanty redhat com> wrote:
> I still think we are overloading the atomic name. The idea of atomic host is
> to create a platform for running containers. So if the project has nothing
> to do with the platform then I think we should not use the atomic  prefix.
>
> I am seeing people already getting confused between atomic command and
> atomic host. And I find it difficult explaining that atomic command is just
> an command line and it has no correlation with atomic operation [1]. I find
> atomicapp name is fine because those apps should be running on atomic hosts
> (ideally) even if they can be run on non-atomic hosts.
>
> IMHO we should not use atomic prefix unless it is really justifiable.

I think we're already to the point where the "Atomic" name/prefix just
refers to "deals with aggregations of closely related subatomic
particles, aka RPMs".

Thus Atomic Host is managed atomically (through rpm-ostree) and runs
atomically updated components (through containers).
The "atomic" command installs and runs atomically updated components
The "atomicapp" command defines atomically updated components
The "atomic-reactor" command creates atomically updated components
from their subatomic particles (aka RPMs)

So it's a different meaning from the original "atomically upgrade
host" meaning, but still a coherent one.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan gmail com   |   Brisbane, Australia