|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Message-ID: <4E791784.6080709@psu.edu> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 18:45:24 -0400 From: Phil Pishioneri <pgp@psu.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1316531866.2684.523.camel@willson.li.ssimo.org> Cc: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, krbdev@mit.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: krbdev-bounces@mit.edu On 9/20/11 11:17 AM, Simo Sorce wrote: > I would say that a vendor prefix makes for a better name space (and let > displaying code to more easily order alphabetically and get all vendor > related keys together with ease). > Something like: > > mit_otp_name = value > rh_otp_name = value Are reverse domain components (ala Java) too wordy? edu.mit.otp_name com.redhat.otp_name -Phil _______________________________________________ krbdev mailing list krbdev@mit.edu https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |