From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Jul  5 16:29:01 1995
Return-Path: hackers-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id QAA11210
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 5 Jul 1995 16:29:01 -0700
Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (sri.MT.net [204.94.231.129])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA11198
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 5 Jul 1995 16:28:58 -0700
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id RAA14747; Wed, 5 Jul 1995 17:30:52 -0600
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 1995 17:30:52 -0600
Message-Id: <199507052330.RAA14747@rocky.sri.MT.net>
To: kelly@fsl.noaa.gov (Sean Kelly)
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: List name-change ( was Re: Proposal to change name of this list to a less embarrassing one)
In-Reply-To: <9507052314.AA17533@emu.fsl.noaa.gov>
References: <5100.804977520@freefall.cdrom.com>
	<9507052314.AA17533@emu.fsl.noaa.gov>
Reply-To: nate@sneezy.sri.com (Nate Williams)
From: nate@sneezy.sri.com (Nate Williams)
Sender: hackers-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

Sean Kelly writes:
> >>>>> "Jordan" == Jordan K Hubbard <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com> writes:
> 
>     Jordan> How about "devel"?
> 
> `devel' is appropriate given the BSD daemons that are hanging about,
> but I just don't like devel as an abbreviation for `development' or
> `developers' or whatever.  I think `dev' communicates the same idea
> more concisely and attractively.

FYI - Daemons aka 'devils' are spelled with an 'i' and not with an 'e'.

I think the change to 'dev' or 'devel' is fine, and although I don't
have any personal reasons for choosing one over the other, the shorter
name is nicer because it means less typing. :-)


Nate