Renaming s4 'net' to 'samba-tool'

[Jelmer Vernooij]

On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 23:07 +0300, Kamen Mazdrashki wrote:
> Hi Jelmer,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 22:12, Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer at vernstok.nl> wrote:
> > Does anybody else have an opinion on this? samba-tool seems reasonable
> > to me for the reasons Kai mentions, and it'd be great if we can move
> > this forward so we can allow installation of both trees at the same
> > time.
> >
> It seems nobody can come up with a good name for a tool that does-it-all
> and everybody get used to just call it 'net' :)
> I think that no matter what we come up with, it will be equally good and bad.
> Personally I like 'samba-adm' a little bit more as most of the task the tool
> performs and I know of are in admin domain
> 'samba-tool' is nice too!
So, I think samba-adm would probably make more sense as a name except
that we actually have functionality in net that doesn't qualify as
administration. 

I think samba-adm or samba-admin would be good names, but we'd have to
move some of the existing functionality out into a different tool if we
use them.

Cheers,

Jelmer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20101027/ba41f923/attachment.pgp>