On 05/01/2014 08:31 PM, Shawn Wells wrote:
>> >To express my subjective opinion I like the idea of the
project to be
>> >renamed to "OpenSCAP Security Guide". But wanted to know wider
>> >from the community on the potential translation.
> I think it's not necessary to rename the projects themselves. However I am all
for promoting the OpenSCAP "umbrella" and cross linking the projects. Renaming
the projects would be very costly and confusing for existing users. The benefits
aren't worth it IMO.
> In my opinion scap-security-guide should stay as is because openscap-security-guide
implies a tool lock-in which is not the case.
Jan, thank you for starting this conversation! I'm _*very*_ much in
favor of a unified umbrella/naming.
As sgrubb pointed out, OpenSCAP has classically been the interpreter. If
we rename SSG to "OpenSCAP Security Guide," the name creates an
impression the content would only work with OpenSCAP. For this reason,
are you proposing we change the OpenSCAP interpreter as well? e.g.:
OpenSCAP: A portfolio of open source SCAP utilities and content, which
* OpenSCAP Workbench: Used for tailoring content (formerally
* OpenSCAP Interpreter: A cross platform, open source SCAP
* OpenSCAP Content: An open source project delivering a
large body of SCAP content. Used as upstream for such profiles as the
STIG and C2S
* OpenSCAP Anaconda Plugin: A project to integrate SCAP
scanning into Linux provisioning
* OpenSCAP Spacewalk Plugin: A project to integrate
centralized SCAP scanning into the Spacewalk/Satellite system management
I like this idea.
However, I am afraid we are not able to enforce openscap package rename
everywhere to ensure consistent look. OpenSCAP library is spread across
to many downstreams. That leads me to conclusion that perhaps we don't
need to rename the downstream packages. Perhaps, we can just leverage
this idea to better describe ecosystem to newcomers.