Dan Price wrote:
On Mon 09 Mar 2009 at 07:25PM, Danek Duvall wrote:
I know it's a tad late, but I've been thinking that set-authority and
unset-authority have always seemed a bit awkward in their names, and set-
and unset-publisher just a little bit more so.
It occurred to me that "subscribe" and "unsubscribe" might be better verbs.
Are they flexible enough to convey what we want? Nothing about "publisher"
needs to change, except for the subcommand names, I think, since you could
say it makes sense to "subscribe" to a "publisher", rather than to a
"subscription", which just sounds silly.
Funny enough, I was just thinking that
'pkg publisher'
was a little awkward, and wondering if it ought to be pkg list-publisher
or some such.
Well, if we were to follow the CLIP guidelines (as I understand section
7.2 of it anyway), it should be:
add-publisher
create-publisher
delete-publisher
list-publisher
modify-publisher
The above could be mapped to our existing commands as follows (roughly):
add-publisher -> set-publisher
create-publisher -> set-publisher
modify-publisher -> set-publisher
delete-publisher -> unset-publisher
list-publisher -> publisher
...this brings out the interesting point that our set-publisher performs
triple-duty as add, create, and modify.
Problem with 'subscribe', in my mind, is that it doesn't do a good
job of encapsulating the "modify" part of the functionality.
But maybe it's better than not.
Maybe do some mockups?
I think "subscribe-publisher" is too wordy personally, but I could be
convinced otherwise.
It's not too late to change any of this as far as I'm concerned; it's
up to you. However, I would probably defer it until after the feature
freeze is over so that there's adequate time for documentation updates.
I'm open to suggestions.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
