[3490] in Release_7.7_team
Re: Minutes of 2002-09-11 release team meeting
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (t. belton)
Thu Sep 12 12:04:00 2002
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:03:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: "t. belton" <tbelton@MIT.EDU>
To: Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU>
cc: <release-team@MIT.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <1031846051.4378.33.camel@error-messages.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.33L.0209121158450.19203-100000@iphigenia.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> I don't see how "erase_certs" is a stronger name. It doesn't make it
> clear that preferences are being wiped out in addition to certificates,
> and "clear_certs" makes it pretty clear that certificates will be
> deleted.
Heh. That's what prompted me to add the Monty Python quote to my previous
message (I was having a Bill moment). Perhaps we should call it
'really_permanently_delete_certs'?
Just kidding. Eh. I guess it's subjective. 'clear_certs' is what I'd
name something that removed the certs settings from the preferences
file, but didn't touch the certs themselves. 'clear' to me means "Reset
to default state," not "permanently destroy data."
So long as this script is only used when recommended by a help
practitioner, I don't care about the name so much. I'd almost like to name
it something incognito so that no one would stumble on it by accident.
I'll go with clearcerts, removing that pesky underscore (why don't you
like underscores, by the by?) unless someone comes up with something
absolutely brilliant before the end of the afternoon that wows us all.
