8:26 a.m.
So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity folks have
been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy Server",
which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because I
can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its creators are
calling "crazy".
So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion would
be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
8:30 a.m.
On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 09:26 -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity
folks have
been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy
Server",
which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly
because I
can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its
creators are
calling "crazy".
So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal
suggestion would
be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
How about
Adaptive Infrastructure eXtensions, or AIX?
(For the record: yes, it's a joke!)
>
> _______________________________________________
> server mailing list -- server(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to server-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
10:58 a.m.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity
folks have
been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy Server",
which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because I
can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its creators are
calling "crazy".
Extremely enthusiastic server is a bit long though.
So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion would
be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
What makes it adaptive? If it's only user initiated, that's
customization. Adaptation indicates the server dynamically alters its
behavior on its own.
--
Chris Murphy
11:08 a.m.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 09:58:47AM -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of
Modularity folks have
> been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy
Server",
> which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because I
> can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its creators are
> calling "crazy".
Extremely enthusiastic server is a bit long though.
Fedora Server Mad Scientist Edition
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
11:10 a.m.
On 12/12/2016 11:58 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Stephen Gallagher
<sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity folks have
> been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy
Server",
> which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because I
> can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its creators are
> calling "crazy".
Extremely enthusiastic server is a bit long though.
>
> So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion would
> be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
What makes it adaptive? If it's only user initiated, that's
customization. Adaptation indicates the server dynamically alters its
behavior on its own.
Well, the infrastructure adapts to the needs of the users. Not the installed
system. In the classic Fedora Server, you get exactly the set of stuff available
in the common repository and if you want something else, you need to figure out
a workaround. With the modularity implementation, it becomes possible (and
supportable) to pull in the set of stuff you need to support your application.
Also, I was looking for a term that would carry some positive "marketing"
connotations, beyond the simple descriptive nature of "Modular Server".
Basically, something that catches the eye enough that someone keeps reading to
find out what it means.
11:11 a.m.
On 12/12/2016 10:13 AM, Marius Vollmer wrote:
Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> writes:
> So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion would
> be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
"Modular Server"?
(Reprinting from another reply)
I was looking for a term that would carry some positive "marketing"
connotations, beyond the simple descriptive nature of "Modular Server".
Basically, something that catches the eye enough that someone keeps reading to
find out what it means.
11:17 a.m.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 09:26:25AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity
folks have
been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy Server",
which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because I
can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its creators are
calling "crazy".
So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion would
be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
Puzzle Server?
--
Tomasz Torcz Morality must always be based on practicality.
xmpp: zdzichubg(a)chrome.pl -- Baron Vladimir Harkonnen
11:19 a.m.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 12/12/2016 11:58 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>> So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity folks have
>> been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy
Server",
>> which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because I
>> can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its creators
are
>> calling "crazy".
>
> Extremely enthusiastic server is a bit long though.
>
>
>>
>> So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion would
>> be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
>
> What makes it adaptive? If it's only user initiated, that's
> customization. Adaptation indicates the server dynamically alters its
> behavior on its own.
>
Well, the infrastructure adapts to the needs of the users. Not the installed
system. In the classic Fedora Server, you get exactly the set of stuff available
in the common repository and if you want something else, you need to figure out
a workaround. With the modularity implementation, it becomes possible (and
supportable) to pull in the set of stuff you need to support your application.
Also, I was looking for a term that would carry some positive "marketing"
connotations, beyond the simple descriptive nature of "Modular Server".
Basically, something that catches the eye enough that someone keeps reading to
find out what it means.
Maybe a job for Marvin the Martian. Just make up a word. But hey I'm
not a marketer.
--
Chris Murphy
11:31 a.m.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Stephen Gallagher
<sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 12/12/2016 11:58 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>>> So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity folks
have
>>> been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy
Server",
>>> which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because
I
>>> can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its
creators are
>>> calling "crazy".
>>
>> Extremely enthusiastic server is a bit long though.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion
would
>>> be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
>>
>> What makes it adaptive? If it's only user initiated, that's
>> customization. Adaptation indicates the server dynamically alters its
>> behavior on its own.
>>
>
> Well, the infrastructure adapts to the needs of the users. Not the installed
> system. In the classic Fedora Server, you get exactly the set of stuff available
> in the common repository and if you want something else, you need to figure out
> a workaround. With the modularity implementation, it becomes possible (and
> supportable) to pull in the set of stuff you need to support your application.
>
> Also, I was looking for a term that would carry some positive "marketing"
> connotations, beyond the simple descriptive nature of "Modular Server".
> Basically, something that catches the eye enough that someone keeps reading to
> find out what it means.
Maybe a job for Marvin the Martian. Just make up a word. But hey I'm
not a marketer.
Make up a word, kinda like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsela
Or name them after Greek mythological figures or something, Atalanta Server.
--
Chris Murphy
11:34 a.m.
On 12/12/2016 12:31 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Chris Murphy
<lists(a)colorremedies.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>> On 12/12/2016 11:58 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Stephen Gallagher
<sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity
folks have
>>>> been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of
"Crazy Server",
>>>> which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly
because I
>>>> can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its
creators are
>>>> calling "crazy".
>>>
>>> Extremely enthusiastic server is a bit long though.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion
would
>>>> be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
>>>
>>> What makes it adaptive? If it's only user initiated, that's
>>> customization. Adaptation indicates the server dynamically alters its
>>> behavior on its own.
>>>
>>
>> Well, the infrastructure adapts to the needs of the users. Not the installed
>> system. In the classic Fedora Server, you get exactly the set of stuff available
>> in the common repository and if you want something else, you need to figure out
>> a workaround. With the modularity implementation, it becomes possible (and
>> supportable) to pull in the set of stuff you need to support your application.
>>
>> Also, I was looking for a term that would carry some positive
"marketing"
>> connotations, beyond the simple descriptive nature of "Modular
Server".
>> Basically, something that catches the eye enough that someone keeps reading to
>> find out what it means.
>
> Maybe a job for Marvin the Martian. Just make up a word. But hey I'm
> not a marketer.
Make up a word, kinda like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsela
Wow, I thought I was the only person who ever had those :)
Or name them after Greek mythological figures or something, Atalanta
Server.
2:17 p.m.
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 12/12/2016 12:31 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com>
wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
>>> On 12/12/2016 11:58 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 7:26 AM, Stephen Gallagher
<sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>> So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity
folks have
>>>>> been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of
"Crazy Server",
>>>>> which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly
because I
>>>>> can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something
its creators are
>>>>> calling "crazy".
>>>>
>>>> Extremely enthusiastic server is a bit long though.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal
suggestion would
>>>>> be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions
welcome.
>>>>
>>>> What makes it adaptive? If it's only user initiated, that's
>>>> customization. Adaptation indicates the server dynamically alters its
>>>> behavior on its own.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, the infrastructure adapts to the needs of the users. Not the installed
>>> system. In the classic Fedora Server, you get exactly the set of stuff
available
>>> in the common repository and if you want something else, you need to figure
out
>>> a workaround. With the modularity implementation, it becomes possible (and
>>> supportable) to pull in the set of stuff you need to support your
application.
>>>
>>> Also, I was looking for a term that would carry some positive
"marketing"
>>> connotations, beyond the simple descriptive nature of "Modular
Server".
>>> Basically, something that catches the eye enough that someone keeps reading
to
>>> find out what it means.
>>
>> Maybe a job for Marvin the Martian. Just make up a word. But hey I'm
>> not a marketer.
>
> Make up a word, kinda like this:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsela
>
Wow, I thought I was the only person who ever had those :)
I sorta wish I'd had the room to keep the cool stuff like this. About
the same time I had one of these. $80 vintage, I could have it again!
http://www.tgldirect.com/product_files/631101090000/vintage-metal-mighty-...
Capsela 1000, $220 damn.
A storage unit definitely would have cost a lot more though.
--
Chris Murphy
2:08 a.m.
Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> writes:
On 12/12/2016 10:13 AM, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> writes:
>
>> So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion would
>> be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
>
> "Modular Server"?
I was looking for a term that would carry some positive "marketing"
connotations, beyond the simple descriptive nature of "Modular Server".
Basically, something that catches the eye enough that someone keeps reading to
find out what it means.
"Super Modular Server"? :-)
If you are looking for a non-descriptive name, what about "Honeycomb"?
Honeycombs are modular and all around positive. Honeycomb Server, mmmm nam.
7:03 a.m.
On 12/13/2016 03:08 AM, Marius Vollmer wrote:
Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> writes:
> On 12/12/2016 10:13 AM, Marius Vollmer wrote:
>> Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>> So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion
would
>>> be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
>>
>> "Modular Server"?
>
> I was looking for a term that would carry some positive "marketing"
> connotations, beyond the simple descriptive nature of "Modular Server".
>
> Basically, something that catches the eye enough that someone keeps reading to
> find out what it means.
"Super Modular Server"? :-)
If you are looking for a non-descriptive name, what about "Honeycomb"?
Honeycombs are modular and all around positive. Honeycomb Server, mmmm nam.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_Honeycomb
(Not Android's finest moment, either)
7:29 a.m.
On 2016-12-12 15:26, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity
folks have
been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy Server",
which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because I
can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its creators are
calling "crazy".
So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion would
be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
So Modular is obviously an implementation detail in order to achieve a
specific solution, but what is the problem the modular initiative is
trying to solve?
Some name that refers to that could work I think.
- Andreas
7:46 a.m.
On 12/13/2016 08:29 AM, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
On 2016-12-12 15:26, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity folks have
> been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy
Server",
> which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because I
> can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its creators are
> calling "crazy".
>
> So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion would
> be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
So Modular is obviously an implementation detail in order to achieve a specific
solution, but what is the problem the modular initiative is trying to solve?
Some name that refers to that could work I think.
Right, so the modular approach is an attempt to deal with the "Too Fast/Too
Slow" problem in Fedora. (Essentially, that everyone wants the libraries on the
system to be static and unchanging... except their pet library/framework that
absolutely has to be the latest available version.)
That's why I suggested "Adaptive"... the design of Server lends itself to
adapting to your needs without forcing you to go into uncharted
build-it-yourself territory.
7:49 a.m.
On 12/13/2016 08:29 AM, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
On 2016-12-12 15:26, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> So, up to this point, Langdon White and his merry band of Modularity folks have
> been calling the proposed modular Fedora Server by the name of "Crazy
Server",
> which I am not fond of. This is for a number of reasons, but mostly because I
> can't imagine anyone willingly installing and trying something its creators are
> calling "crazy".
>
> So, I think we need a better name for this effort. My personal suggestion would
> be to call it "Adaptive Server". Other suggestions welcome.
So Modular is obviously an implementation detail in order to achieve a specific
solution, but what is the problem the modular initiative is trying to solve?
Some name that refers to that could work I think.
Right, so the modular approach is an attempt to deal with the "Too Fast/Too
Slow" problem in Fedora. (Essentially, that everyone wants the libraries on the
system to be static and unchanging... except their pet library/framework that
absolutely has to be the latest available version.)
That's why I suggested "Adaptive"... the design of Server lends itself to
adapting to your needs without forcing you to go into uncharted
build-it-yourself territory.
7:50 a.m.
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 8:29 AM, Andreas Nilsson <lists(a)andreasn.se> wrote:
So Modular is obviously an implementation detail in order to achieve
a
specific solution, but what is the problem the modular initiative is trying
to solve?
Some name that refers to that could work I think.
I personally think that Adaptive Server defines that well - it adapts
to the current environment - i.e. the version of httpd is decoupled
from the release. so it is adaptive to the requirements of the user.
8:18 a.m.
If it solves the too fast/too slow problem, call it....
Pace
Beat
Canter
Double Time
Stride
Metre
Hypermetre
Measure
Prosody
Polyrhythm (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZBi-DNO36A)
Tock (as in tick-)
Synchrony
Verse
Epos (maybe too grandiose - a body of poetry that conveys the traditions of a society by
treating some epic theme (poetry being about rhythm and pace, Fedora being epic, haha)
Here's an interesting word. Modulation. This is modular. Modulation has the same root
but refers to music moving from one key to another. Maybe not useful tho. It's less
rhythm-oriented and more about pitch.
Here's another one. Assemble. An assembly is a unit comprised of modular parts, yes?
Can also refer to the act of putting them together - assembling. But it also refers to an
assembly, in an auditorium - an open public gathering. It also refers to the gathering
together of people; musically different people singing together to make music eg a chorus.
Assemble, assembly, assemblage.
~m
3:37 p.m.
Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> writes:
2011! Nobody remembers that!
2684
days inactive
2685
days old
server@lists.fedoraproject.org
20 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
Andreas Nilsson -
Chris Murphy -
Greg DeKoenigsberg -
Jon Stanley -
Marius Vollmer -
Matthew Miller -
Máirín Duffy -
Russell Doty -
Stephen Gallagher -
Tomasz Torcz