Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

docker.sh doesn't need an extension and could have a more descriptive name #1

Open
almereyda opened this issue Dec 26, 2014 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@almereyda
Copy link

Currently docker.sh is the name of the central provision script.
Why not call it provision, metamaps or deploy and omit the file extension completely?

The docs would then read:

$ ./metamaps prepare
$ ./metamaps build
$ ./metamaps run db
$ ./metamaps run mm // this job's name could also be web instead
$ ./metamaps seed

Maybe just cosmetical, but due to the high quality of the README, I can imagine it being improved even further.

@ds0nt
Copy link
Owner

ds0nt commented Dec 26, 2014

Thanks. Will do.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants