Hi! 

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013, Steven J. Long wrote:
> Thanks, that sounds reasonable: one minor nitpick, though. Could you not
> call it 'stdnet'? Since from all the other discussion it appears like this
> is not going away soon for the vast majority of users, but simply being
> maintained as another package, which makes sense. And it is the standard Gentoo
> networking setup.
> 
> That way, 'newnet' is clearly a more modern variant, but no-one's disparaging
> the traditional setup, which is after all, still the default.

+1 It is something that had me puzzled for quite a while. Was I
supposed to migrate? Was the current somehow broken? 

I'm still not quite sure what newnet does that oldnet doesn't, or
why somebody felt it was necessary to make a new package (and no,
let's not discuss that here). Whatever it is, ideally, it would
reflected in the name(s). And package descriptions.

Regards,
Tobias