Curiosity: Why is the OpenBMC layer named "phosphor"

[Muggeridge, Matt]

Thanks Brad.

That is an interesting tale.  I love the history lesson.

Cheers,
Matt.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Khetan, Sharad <sharad.khetan at intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 October 2019 3:01 AM
> To: Brad Bishop <bradleyb at fuzziesquirrel.com>; Muggeridge, Matt
> <matt.muggeridge2 at hpe.com>
> Cc: OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc at lists.ozlabs.org>
> Subject: RE: Curiosity: Why is the OpenBMC layer named "phosphor"
> 
> Very interesting. I have wondered about nomenclature but didn’t know the
> roots were fishy 😊.
> -Sharad
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: openbmc <openbmc-
> bounces+sharad.khetan=intel.com at lists.ozlabs.org> On Behalf Of Brad
> Bishop
> Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 7:13 AM
> To: Muggeridge, Matt <matt.muggeridge2 at hpe.com>
> Cc: OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc at lists.ozlabs.org>
> Subject: Re: Curiosity: Why is the OpenBMC layer named "phosphor"
> 
> 
> 
> > On Oct 23, 2019, at 8:21 PM, Muggeridge, Matt
> <matt.muggeridge2 at hpe.com> wrote:
> >
> > I see “phosphor” shows up all over the place in openbmc.  E.g. meta-
> phosphor is the OpenBMC layer.
> >
> > Is phosphor a project name that will evolve with OpenBMC generations or
> is it forever static?
> 
> At the moment it is static but that isn’t any kind of hard and fast rule.  It is
> typically used to distinguish a default or reference implementation but that
> definition and its usage is certainly fuzzy.
> 
> The first platform supported by this project back in 2015 was the barreleye
> system.  Barreleye is a kind of fish - it has a phosphorescent glow; meta-
> phosphor is a nod to those roots of the project.
> 
> thx - brad