[OCF]Naming conventions

[Alan Robertson]

Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
> 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 
>>change our naming convention.  Right now, we tend to prefix things by OCF_. 
>> I think that would be better changed to LSB_, since our goal is to 
>>eventually become part of the Linux Standards Base, and that's their naming 
>>convention.
> 
> 
> Some reasons against it:
> 
> - LSB_ prefixes may not go down well for people writing resource agents
>   on FreeBSD

OK.  Point noted.  Solaris and *BSD folks ought to be consulted.  [The *BSD 
folks probably won't get too bent out of shape, but the Solaris folks might].

> 
> - 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.

I think we should discuss this with the LSB and/or LSB folks, and see what 
they have to say.

My concern is that if we do this, and later on we do become part of the 
official standard, then they may come along and change them all for us ;-)


-- 
     Alan Robertson <alanr@unix.sh>

"Openness is the foundation and preservative of friendship...  Let me claim 
from you at all times your undisguised opinions." - William Wilberforce