From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Thu Aug 25 20:33:43 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F9C2BC49AC; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 20:33:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cse.cem@gmail.com) Received: from mail-it0-f52.google.com (mail-it0-f52.google.com [209.85.214.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31B701685; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 20:33:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cse.cem@gmail.com) Received: by mail-it0-f52.google.com with SMTP id e63so294872376ith.1; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:33:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FbYH6BdXVrjFhWK5rFs7Pft3uxJnvz7i7CasjaJq1e8=; b=LMOoadhpWSHPMse69zD1qF2MGLevNFWO5j/nnxOGKDKGqkVwecDgfIHcTZA5fohNXw 5VePjQjrXp5Z3FgfXcbUmM6AjykOrUG7ml55a4kijBoiT2rk4HwkPfZBwTvJQA8fY0Jd E7VzbiKMBFml2N/UfLbikHCiUTfwqQW7X7wGcbnrYczC4zxeEOXuBO4Ttd7Xbj3Ntdke /27zMJX5WS93BVxKkGYnsm5CZ9FS3wyxKXk8IaQUrLL1o3GUCbfsp/NtmXqfJ4088ZVg aon70xm3BghnF3X/5f/NdniWxgL7O2Xj0uXBOFlcT5AJzipqB1W5mA5wPlpkeAXMLyQJ qNJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoous9nx1fqHCXSbRTCHZBr48yFVQy6BfB5m4DFhTU/8S7Bvl+z9yq3u4YPDqc4+qUQQ== X-Received: by 10.107.130.81 with SMTP id e78mr13881952iod.137.1472156773734; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-it0-f42.google.com (mail-it0-f42.google.com. [209.85.214.42]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y194sm6204497iod.17.2016.08.25.13.26.11 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:26:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-it0-f42.google.com with SMTP id x131so294050606ite.0; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:26:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.36.227.4 with SMTP id d4mr6962276ith.97.1472156771706; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:26:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: cem@freebsd.org Received: by 10.36.220.129 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:26:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1A050E0F-4B9F-420A-97C6-C203B92A5F3F@FreeBSD.org> References: <201608251940.u7PJePv3023083@repo.freebsd.org> <23395083.lPEyYQ7ZbW@ralph.baldwin.cx> <1A050E0F-4B9F-420A-97C6-C203B92A5F3F@FreeBSD.org> From: Conrad Meyer Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:26:11 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r304815 - in head: lib lib/libifc share/examples/libifc share/mk To: Kristof Provost Cc: John Baldwin , Marie Helene Kvello-Aune , src-committers , svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 20:33:43 -0000 On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Kristof Provost wrote: > On 25 Aug 2016, at 22:14, John Baldwin wrote: >> I hate even writing this mail, and it looks like the topic wasn't really >> discussed in the review, but I think libifconfig is probably the "better" >> name if the goal is to move most of ifconfig into it. Certainly if a >> developer is looking for a library that provides a programmatic interface >> to the same operations a user does via ifconfig, libifconfig is the name >> they will look for first. > > This is the right time to bring this sort of thing up. One of the reasons > I pushed to get this in the tree in this very early state was to provoke > exactly this sort of response. Right now the work is still in an early state > and changing this sort of thing is still possible. > > The name was in fact discussed privately, and we figured libifconfig was a > bit > on the long side. > > I certainly take your point about libifc_. Does anyone else have any views > regarding > the naming (or other subjects)? Hi, I don't have anything to add, other than a "me too." I'd second John's suggestions. 'libifconfig' for the library name is more reasonable than libifc. And just 'ifc_' (or even 'ifconfig_') prefixes for public library routines is sufficient. Thanks, Conrad