[OCF]Naming conventions

[Lars Marowsky-Bree]

--Qbvjkv9qwOGw/5Fx
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2003-07-18T16:51:14,
   Alan Robertson <alanr@unix.sh> said:

> Now that we're part of the Free Standards group, I believe we ought to=20
> change our naming convention.  Right now, we tend to prefix things by OCF=
_.=20
>  I think that would be better changed to LSB_, since our goal is to=20
> eventually become part of the Linux Standards Base, and that's their nami=
ng=20
> convention.

Some reasons against it:

- LSB_ prefixes may not go down well for people writing resource agents
  on FreeBSD

- We should to get LSB approval before doing that in any case

- Even though we want to have LSB to say that OCF is part of them, it's
  still somewhat different and a different FSG working group etc

The advantage is that 'instances' make sense even for non-clustered
operations, so then OCF_ wouldn't be an appropriate prefix either.

I don't feel _strongly_ against it, but I think it's not a good idea
overall.


Sincerely,
    Lars Marowsky-Br=E9e <lmb@suse.de>

--=20
SuSE Labs - Research & Development, SuSE Linux AG
 =20
"If anything can go wrong, it will." "Chance favors the prepared (mind)."
  -- Capt. Edward A. Murphy            -- Louis Pasteur

--Qbvjkv9qwOGw/5Fx
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/GXo1udf3XQV4S2cRAhIpAJ9t33wGHBlzkHHFG7i3NGBb2e24OgCdE0OO
uXYIbeliQgkF+SrnALHmFts=
=tG9Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Qbvjkv9qwOGw/5Fx--