[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: The Big ACL Opening



seth vidal wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-10-18 at 00:51 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>> On Fri, 2008-10-17 at 18:31 -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 03:54:25PM -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 3:01 PM, Alan Cox <alan redhat com> wrote:
>>>>>> FWIW, I really don't care, and am fine with uberpackager, ultrapacakger,
>>>>>> and superpackager.
>>>>> Super is probably sane enough but English has a long and distinguished
>>>>> history of stealing other peoples words and using them wrongly so uber- in
>>>>> English [ab]use is not atypical ;)
>>>>>
>>>> or adding them together... super-ultra-ginormous packager.
>>>>
>>>> super was used a lot so it was no longer super. I think that is when
>>>> Ultra was the new super.. Uber was the 80's new Super since it 'should
>>>> have' umlauts like any 'proper' Germanic word. I mean how else can you
>>>> have a rock band name without umlauts.  I think gi-normous  is the
>>>> current generations super...
>>> How about a more neutral term?
>>>
>>> experiencedpackager
>>> trustedpackager
>>>
>>> Here's some that imply scope rather than "l33tness"? (no, lets not use 
>>> l33tpackager as fun as it sounds).  Since those packagers can touch 
>>> (almost) all packages how about:
>>>
>>> globalpackager
>>> universepackager
>>> everypackager
>> "Allpackager," kind of like "allspice."
>>
> 
> OdinPackager? 
> WednesdayPackager?
> 
Okay but then I insist on renaming the intro level Packager group to
PugsleyPackager. :-)

-Toshio

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]