Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

docker: rename docker to moby #1670

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 2, 2017
Merged

Conversation

InuSasha
Copy link
Member

@InuSasha InuSasha commented Jun 3, 2017

No description provided.

@InuSasha InuSasha force-pushed the fixes/moby branch 3 times, most recently from de4275f to 99dc3b5 Compare June 8, 2017 17:27
@InuSasha
Copy link
Member Author

InuSasha commented Jun 8, 2017

added changelog entry and drop ADDON variables from moby package.mk

docker PKG_SECTION should now virtual, because it is only a wrapper for moby and tools.
But i can not overview the possible problems in deployment on the addon server, so i do not change it.

@lrusak
Copy link
Member

lrusak commented Jun 14, 2017

I'm ok with this as it will continue to be named service.system.docker

@awiouy
Copy link
Collaborator

awiouy commented Jun 20, 2017

Why not just change PKG_ADDON_NAME, PKG_LONGDESC and PKG_SHORTDESC, which are purely cosmetic, to Moby? Is there such a thing as a copyrighted/trademarked file/service name?

@InuSasha
Copy link
Member Author

InuSasha commented Jun 21, 2017

When i correct understand it, docker will divided into several parts/modules.
The bundle will called docker, but the parts will get other names, of cause.
Moby is only one part.
So the addon description should not change, but the moby package will.

edit: update description in moby package. rebase against master

@nomandera
Copy link
Contributor

This absolutely will need to happen but in my opinion this is not the time for us to be trailblazing. Accept and park until the world understands what the Moby distinction is and the dust has settled on the final re-brand (or we run the risk of having to do this more than once).

@piotrasd
Copy link
Contributor

for now others didnt make move to change name, here i mean companies like Synology, QNAP, LimeTech (unraid) etc.

@awiouy
Copy link
Collaborator

awiouy commented Jun 21, 2017

Sorry, I might be thick, but I still do not get why the docker package has to be split into a moby and a docker packages, especially since a docker package remains. Why not simply change the name displayed in the Kodi user interface, via PKG_ADDON_NAME, PKG_LONGDESC and PKG_SHORTDESC.

@lrusak
Copy link
Member

lrusak commented Jun 21, 2017

@awiouy we need to separate the packages so we can continue to use the same add-on name which is service.system.docker. If that were to change then people would lose their data. It's how our build system works by taking the PKG_NAME and the PKG_SECTION

@awiouy
Copy link
Collaborator

awiouy commented Jun 21, 2017

@lrusak I am aware of that, adding addons to LibreELEC is my trade. I still do not understand the rationale behind the split/rename. The addon can be renamed in the Kodi user interface without changing PKG_NAME or PKG_SECTION. Additional components can be shipped within the package or added from separate packages. Could anyone here explain the purpose of the moby package, apart from creating an apparently useless matryoshka?

@InuSasha
Copy link
Member Author

believe not needed after #1796

@InuSasha InuSasha closed this Jul 15, 2017
@lrusak
Copy link
Member

lrusak commented Jul 15, 2017

@InuSasha I'd still like to do it this way.

@chewitt
Copy link
Member

chewitt commented Jul 15, 2017

I'd prefer to leave this open so the topic isn't forgotten about, regardless of what form we commit something in at a later stage. @InuSasha we can very slow at this stuff sometimes :)

@chewitt chewitt reopened this Jul 15, 2017
Copy link
Contributor

@Ray-future Ray-future left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like those changes too. It clearly divides the package like it is upstream. Makes a lot of sense to me.

@InuSasha
Copy link
Member Author

rebase to current master, to solve merge conflicts

@Ray-future Ray-future merged commit fceb13f into LibreELEC:master Nov 2, 2017
@InuSasha InuSasha deleted the fixes/moby branch November 2, 2017 19:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants