search

Praqma / repository-standards

MIT License
0 stars 1 forks source link

Naming conventions are missing #8

Open buep opened 8 years ago

buep commented 8 years ago

repository name: docker-$applicationname becomes on docker hub: praqma/$applicationame

if the repository is only a docker image repo

Further all jenkins plugins, ends in "-plugin"

sofusalbertsen commented 8 years ago

Please issue a pull request with the details sketched here.

buep commented 8 years ago

More inputs - based on our slack dialog:

... - note that our repos that only is used for docker images starts with 'docker', e.g. https://github.com/Praqma/docker-gh-pages which becomes gh-pages docker image on our docker hub. I hope you can still rename it... GitHub Praqma/docker-gh-pages docker-gh-pages - Dockerfile for creating a docker container for building jekyll enabled Github pages.

...

Naming a repo docker-something is not allowed by Docker Inc. https://www.docker.com/brand-guidelines Docker Brand Guidelines Docker logo and marks usage We’re thrilled that you want to refer to either the Docker project or Docker, Inc goods and services, and sincerely appreciate your help spreading the word. This page aims to provide you with all the information and resources you need for a correct use of the Docker brand assets. (48KB) June 6th, 2015 at 00:49

https://www.andreas-jung.com/contents/dont-use-docker-in-github-repo-names-or-as-twitter-handle andreas-jung.com Don't use "docker" in Github repo names or as Twitter handles - Andreas Jung The company for Zope, Plone, Python, MongoDB and Electronic Publishing .... I guess that sort of closes that discussion. No “docker-xyz” for us then. Do you want to come up with another naming scheme that doesn’t violate Dockers guidelines, or should we just remove “docker” from the names again? ....
I oh, and by the way, Bue suggested “docker-“ prefix and not “praqma-“. This however is not allowed due to guidelines, so lets just rename it back to CENTOS-MultiTool. ... Do we have to follow their guidelines? .... For prefix "container" will do, but really the other word works better because the deliverable from the repo is a docker image and delivered to docker hub. Or maybe just skip the prefix? ... I suggest we skip the prefix. If the repo is REALLY only for a docker image, then maybe add -dockerimage as postfix? (edited) ... but lets just leave out the hole thing for now as we suddenly have a lot of repos that needs renaming and maybe it is better not to have any prefix/postfix or what-ever. I'm contributing this dialog to an issue in our repo about repository standards. So please stick with your own name for now - no worries, there is now no real conclusion.