Perhaps we should build a list of all suggestions and then start a vote which one to use.
I think these are the names that were suggested: @Veto @Skip @Exclude @Deactivate @Ignore 2011/12/23 Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>: > hi arne, > > would be also ok for me -> +1 > > regards, > gerhard > > > 2011/12/23 Arne Limburg <[email protected]> > >> What about @Exclude? >> >> Cheers, >> Arne >> >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: Gerhard Petracek [mailto:[email protected]] >> Gesendet: Freitag, 23. Dezember 2011 21:28 >> An: [email protected] >> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] [DELTASPIKE-8] @Veto >> >> +0.5 for @Skip >> as mentioned in the original thread @Veto is accurate from a technical >> perspective, but it sounds strange for users who aren't aware of the >> mechanism behind. >> >> if we are talking only about @Veto vs @Skip and not about the other >> alternatives: +1 for @Skip >> >> regards, >> gerhard >> >> >> >> 2011/12/23 Dan Allen <[email protected]> >> >> > Veto is rationally the most appropriate since it directly translates >> > to calling ProcessAnnotatedType#veto() >> > >> > However, I'd like to offer one other alternative: >> > >> > @Skip >> > >> > While veto describes what the extension is doing internally, skip is >> > how the developer perceives the result of the action. The class is >> > "skipped over" during the scanning process. This is similar to the >> > suggestion @Ignore, and I think both would get the point across equally >> well. >> > >> > -Dan >> > >> > p.s. Apologizes for dropping the rest of the thread. I wasn't >> > receiving messages when this thread started. >> > >> > -- >> > Dan Allen >> > Principal Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action >> > Registered Linux User #231597 >> > >> > http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen#about >> > http://mojavelinux.com >> > http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction >> > >> -- Christian Kaltepoth Blog: http://chkal.blogspot.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal
