Re: name change for gnome-volume-manager?

[Jan de Groot <jan jgc homeip net>]

On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 15:54 +0200, David Nielsen wrote:
> > The reason I was for g-v-m back then, but support the g-d-m (uh-oh,
> bad
> > acronym!) change now is because the scope of g-v-m has changed from
> just
> > volumes to all devices.  G-v-m is now, in fact, our general policy
> > manager on top of HAL for all hardware.  Toward that end,
> > gnome-hardware-manager makes sense, too.
> 
> Of the proposed names I would personally favor using the term
> hardware,
> it's much nicer for users as device has certain techie feel to it. 

g-d-m should be avoided, we'll get bugreports saying gdm is broken,
while they mean the device manager. Having one name for two things is a
bad thing.

I'd vote for gnome-hardware-manager, as it works on top of H(ardware)AL.