Reminder: juju-core github migration

[roger peppe]

On 3 June 2014 09:19, Andrew Wilkins <andrew.wilkins at canonical.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 4:11 PM, roger peppe <rogpeppe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2 June 2014 19:11, Nate Finch <nate.finch at canonical.com> wrote:
>> > (resending to the right thread)
>> >
>> > This may be a bit late... can we make the repo named juju?
>> >
>> > github.com/juju/juju
>> >
>> > The first Juju is the team, the second Juju is the project.  Core is not
>> > a
>> > thing.  This is pretty much standard operating procedure for big
>> > projects on
>> > github.  Most are github.com/TEAM/PROJECT .... that way, when you're
>> > looking
>> > at the repos under github/juju you see:
>> >
>> > errgo
>> > juju
>> > loggo
>> >
>> > Core is not a thing, it's not the name of anything.  Juju is the project
>> > name.  It happens to be the same as the team name, but lots of repos
>> > have
>> > that.
>> >
>> > If not just "juju", it should be juju-core.  The repo name needs to be
>> > able
>> > to stand on its own.  When someone forks it, they'll get
>> > github.com/natefinch/core for example, which has no information about
>> > what
>> > the heck the repo is for.
>>
>> +1
>
>
> I'm moderately in favour of juju/juju, though
> "github.com/juju/juju/cmd/juju" does not fill me with glee.

Neither github.com/juju/juju/juju :-)

github.com/juju/juju-core/juju is slightly better.

But perhaps it's better just to embrace relative names and go with "core"
and renaming on fork.