Re: [Linuxcoe-devel] HP LinuxCOE versus Open Source LinuxCOE

[Bryan G. <Bry...@HP...>]

Jeff,

> > I think we have to do this.  Then we just maintain our 'addons', we can
> > still call it LinuxCOE internally, changing names would just confuse our
> > internal audience IMO.  But *WE* know it's really HPCOE, OSM, etc....
> 
> "Agreed. Perhaps keep the LinuxCOE prefix and classify it mentally as
> the LinuxCOE [Integration] Project. :)"

I have always envisioned the LinuxCOE as an umbrella project, with the
first fileset to be delivered called SystemDesigner.

> On the other hand, I want to make sure that we communicate with users
> that LinuxCOE is being moved to SourceForge. Bug reports, enhancement
> requests, and even e-mail about the non-proprietary parts of LinuxCOE
> should be handled through our SourceForge tools. It might actually
> result in more confusion to retain the LinuxCOE project name because HP
> people will not be sure where to go for help or to contribute.
> Sunsetting the LinuxCOE project and providing clear communication about
> the new OSLP might be the best way to avoid confusion.

I don't know that we can collapse all support functions onto SF.net.
I would expect our current SR process to remain, and there will still
be internal mailing lists/irc/...  With regard to the move of the
codebase to SF, that should not be an issue, as almost nobody has
checked stuff in anyway (besides the core team).

bryang