I think we should think more about how we want to do that. Is the request only a symlink + knowing how the script was called when when printing out messages or are we talking about full branding, renaming everything and re-packaging foreman_maintain (which is a gem) into satellite_maintain?

I'm ok with providing satellite-maintain symlink directly in the upstream, but I would not recommend getting more sophisticated than that. There has been a lot of confusion when we change the naming upstream vs. downstream.

Btw. keep in mind that there is also /etc/foreman-maintain /var/log/foreman-maintain and and the package name itself. I vote for not having them touched by the branding.

Regarding packaging:

Would it make sense to provide `satellite-maintain` package, that would provide the aliases + strict dependency on specific foreman_maintain package? This way, it would be clear which where the satellite-maintain executable comes from, while keeping upstream packages untouched. It would also allow for the users to run `yum update satellite-maintain` and the dependencies would tell what exactly is the version of foreman-maintain we support downstream.

Thank you for your interest in Satellite 6. We have evaluated this request, and we do not expect this to be implemented in the product in the foreseeable future. We are therefore closing this out as WONTFIX. If you have any concerns about this, please feel free to contact Rich Jerrido or Bryan Kearney. Thank you.

after some discussion going to close this out and just deliver this in 6.5

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1656043