+1 ( and both examples are from me )
It's good that you brought this up now because both of those parameters ( and three of four more) were introduced *after* the last release. Had these ended up in the 1.1.2 release, I would bring up the backwards compatibility argument. Any other thoughts? Any other context parameters added to the code base? What do Struts and Tapestry do?
Struts tends to use "org.apache.struts.XXX" (upper case final portion) for both context init parameters and attribute keys), but it's not universal. Same with JSF (javax.faces.XXXX).
Personally, I can't see this issue being a useful place to become pedantic :-). There are much more important usability issues that deserve attention.
Dennis Byrne
Craig
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Mario Ivankovits [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Monday, April 3, 2006 01:19 AM
>To: 'MyFaces Development'
>Subject: Context configuration parameter name
>
>Hi!
>
>I dont want to be an asshole - so sorry in advance :-) -, but maybe we
>should find a standard how to name our context configuration parameter
>names.
>
>In the past we had the scheme " org.apache.myfaces.XXXXX" where XXXX is
>upper case only.
>
>Now I've seen we got some new configuration parameters named:
>
>org.apache.myfaces.validate
>and
>org.apache.myfaces.secret.cache et al
>
>which is against this naming pattern.
>If others dont think its mandatory to follow this scheme I'll be fine
>too (I wont start a war to archive it ;-) )
>I just wanted to bring this up now, once the user use them it might be
>hard to change it.
>
>If we would like to go the lower-case pattern way, I'll propose to add
>lower-case aliases to our current names.
>
>Ciao,
>Mario
>
>
