On 01/16/2013 12:01 PM, Dan Callaghan wrote:
Right so this is purely a naming debate. But I think the name should
not
be "Beah execution environment" but rather "RHTS-compatible execution
environment" or "execution environment for RHTS-format(ted) tasks" or
something like that. Reasons:
- All the commands are called rhts-*
- Beah doesn't define anything itself, it just emulates RHTS
- RHTS predates Beaker and Beah
I see beah's existence as purely an implementation detail of supporting
RHTS-formatted tasks (or an "RHTS-compatible execution environment") in
Beaker. Some theoretical alternative/future harness might also support
RHTS-formatted tasks, without having anything in common with Beah.
Ah, OK - I had misunderstood which layers were emulating what in the
current setup. I think given that, it's best to just drop that part of
the blurb until we have a good description of the test environment in
the docs to link to. Once we have a suitable link destination for
"RHTS-compatible", then something like "Beaker currently runs all tasks
in an RHTS-compatible execution environment." may work.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan
Red Hat Infrastructure Engineering & Development, Brisbane
Python Applications Team Lead
Beaker Development Lead (
http://beaker-project.org/)
GlobalSync Development Lead (
http://pulpdist.readthedocs.org)