Hi,
during the reviewing process of the new DB module for Berkeley, I made proposal to make a naming convention for all the modules implementing the DB API.
I suggest something similar as for the modules implementing the MI interface, all having the "mi_" prefix. So, for the DB modules we should use "db_" prefix: db_berkeley mysql -> db_mysql postgres -> db_postgres dbtext -> db_text unixodbc -> db_unixodbc flatstore -> db_flatstore
Does anybody see any drawback or problem if we rename the module before 1.3?
Regards, bogdan
Hi,
On Thursday 04 October 2007, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
db_berkeley mysql -> db_mysql postgres -> db_postgres dbtext -> db_text unixodbc -> db_unixodbc flatstore -> db_flatstore
... perlvdb -> db_perlvdb?
Bastian
On Thursday 04 October 2007, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi,
during the reviewing process of the new DB module for Berkeley, I made proposal to make a naming convention for all the modules implementing the DB API.
I suggest something similar as for the modules implementing the MI interface, all having the "mi_" prefix. So, for the DB modules we should use "db_" prefix: db_berkeley mysql -> db_mysql postgres -> db_postgres dbtext -> db_text unixodbc -> db_unixodbc flatstore -> db_flatstore
Does anybody see any drawback or problem if we rename the module before 1.3?
This change is resonable for me _if_ it will be thoroughly carried out. That means in addition to the renaming of the directories its also necessary to
- update the existing module documentation (README files, devel index.html) - fix the build process and the packaging - update openser install documentation (INSTALL, wiki pages) - add a note to the porting guide for 1.3
Cheers,
Henning
On 10/04/07 13:36, Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Thursday 04 October 2007, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi,
during the reviewing process of the new DB module for Berkeley, I made proposal to make a naming convention for all the modules implementing the DB API.
I suggest something similar as for the modules implementing the MI interface, all having the "mi_" prefix. So, for the DB modules we should use "db_" prefix: db_berkeley mysql -> db_mysql postgres -> db_postgres dbtext -> db_text unixodbc -> db_unixodbc flatstore -> db_flatstore
Does anybody see any drawback or problem if we rename the module before 1.3?
This change is resonable for me _if_ it will be thoroughly carried out. That means in addition to the renaming of the directories its also necessary to
- update the existing module documentation (README files, devel index.html)
- fix the build process and the packaging
- update openser install documentation (INSTALL, wiki pages)
- add a note to the porting guide for 1.3
as personal preference, I would add here the option of still being able to use database name in db_url parameters -- looks more natural in config file
modparam("avpops", "db_url", "mysql://openser:openserrw@localhost/openser")
than
modparam("avpops", "db_url", "db_mysql://openser:openserrw@localhost/openser")
Should be easy to attempt to try to find the module "mysql" or "db_mysql"
Since we got in such topics, perhaps we should go further and define a naming policy for: - module name - main file of the module - exported functions by modules
For the first one, should be representative for the functionality brought, and in particular cases (db driver, mi transport, radius extensions, ...) should follow a clear pattern. If going for the above proposed system, first should be the category (same happens now with mi/presence/pua modules), so seems to be the appropriate one. In this way is very easy to spot the group of modules related to a category. Also, the name of the directory should be same as module name.
For the second, there are two main patters - main file name matches the name of the module - main file name is suffixed by "_mod" Several modules do not follow any of above.
For the third, I propose that functions will pe prefixed by several letters derivate from module name, maybe abbreviation, or full name if it is short.
I think these will bring more coherence and consistency in the code and config file. Also, will easy automatic tools for checking exported structures, or generating goodies docs out of C code.
If the time for this release is not enough, we can leave it as it is, but should be taken in consideration for new contributions.
Cheers, Daniel
Cheers,
Henning
Devel mailing list Devel@openser.org http://openser.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
I totally agree that the change should be complete :)... Also Daniel made a point for trying to organize more than the module names..
Anyhow, this can not be done before the SVN freeze and not sure if suitable for testing period (any opinions?) so maybe we have to postpone it for after the release.
regards, bogdan
Henning Westerholt wrote:
On Thursday 04 October 2007, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
Hi,
during the reviewing process of the new DB module for Berkeley, I made proposal to make a naming convention for all the modules implementing the DB API.
I suggest something similar as for the modules implementing the MI interface, all having the "mi_" prefix. So, for the DB modules we should use "db_" prefix: db_berkeley mysql -> db_mysql postgres -> db_postgres dbtext -> db_text unixodbc -> db_unixodbc flatstore -> db_flatstore
Does anybody see any drawback or problem if we rename the module before 1.3?
This change is resonable for me _if_ it will be thoroughly carried out. That means in addition to the renaming of the directories its also necessary to
- update the existing module documentation (README files, devel index.html)
- fix the build process and the packaging
- update openser install documentation (INSTALL, wiki pages)
- add a note to the porting guide for 1.3
Cheers,
Henning