I mean this would make development much faster. Now you have to look through hundreds of extensions to check if your new table isn't going to collide with some other.
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Petr Bena <benap...@gmail.com> wrote: > It's possible someone make extension which contains Code in name, so I > think it would be best to use the full name of extension > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Chad <innocentkil...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Petr Bena <benap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I think we should create a page describing standards for names of keys >>> in preferences and database objects for extensions. I propose to make >>> it standard to prefix all keys in $preferences array with the name of >>> extensions at least or some other words maybe (e_ExtensionName_Value >>> ?). >>> >>> The same should apply for database objects like tables. The main >>> reason for this is to avoid collision given that we already have lot >>> of extensions. What do you think? >>> >> >> For database tables, I think as long as you're consistent >> within an extension, the prefix can be anything that makes >> sense. >> >> For example, in CodeReview we use code_* for our table >> names. >> >> -Chad >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikitech-l mailing list >> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
