Re: A new name for kvm-unit-tests ?

From: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
Cc: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@gmail.com>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>,
	Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
	Liran Alon <liran.alon@oracle.com>,
	Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Subject: Re: A new name for kvm-unit-tests ?
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 08:18:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200731061839.w5vzb2uocmhgudku@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6cfe22f2-b919-d637-ccf2-c479dbc049c2@redhat.com>

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 07:53:31AM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 30/07/2020 13.32, Andrew Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 07:50:39AM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
> >>> On Jul 30, 2020, at 12:35 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 30/07/20 09:13, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> >>>>>> I personally dislike renames as you will have old references lurking in
> >>>>>> the internet for decades. A rename will result in people continue to using
> >>>>>> the old code because the old name is the only thing that they know.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1 for keeping the old name.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> cpu-unit-tests might also not be completely fitting (I remember we
> >>>>> already do test, or will test in the future I/O stuff like PCI, CCW, ...).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> IMHO, It's much more a collection of tests to verify
> >>>>> architecture/standard/whatever compliance (including paravirtualized
> >>>>> interfaces if available).
> >>>
> >>> Good point.
> >>>
> >>>> Vote for keeping the old name.
> >>>
> >>> Ok, so either old name or alternatively arch-unit-tests?  But the
> >>> majority seems to be for kvm-unit-tests, and if Nadav has no trouble
> >>> contributing to them I suppose everyone else can too.
> >>
> >> Indeed. My employer (VMware) did not give me hard time (so far) in
> >> contributing to the project just because it has KVM in its name. We (VMware)
> >> also benefit from kvm-unit-tests, and Paolo and others were receptive to
> >> changes that I made to make it more kvm/qemu -independent. This is what
> >> matters.
> >>
> >> So I am ok with the name being kvm-unit-tests. But I would ask/recommend
> >> that the project description [1] be updated to reflect the fact that the
> >> project is hypervisor-agnostic.
> > 
> > Good idea. Although while I authored what you see there, I don't really
> > want to sign up to do all the writing. How about when we create the gitlab
> > project we also create a .md file that we redirect [1] to? Then anybody
> > can submit patches for it going forward.
> 
> The README.md can now be viewed here:
> 
> https://gitlab.com/kvm-unit-tests/kvm-unit-tests/-/blob/master/README.md
>

Yup, and now I'll try to find time to reformat and import the content at
[1] to another .md file, which we'll keep in the git repo too. I'll then
change the link at the top of the README to point to that and change [1]
to point to it as well.

Thanks,
drew

[1] http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/KVM-unit-tests