As a consumer of the project, I personally like Justin¹s suggestion as it clearly describes what is affected, the message distribution pattern. The others to Alan¹s point are vague and overloaded.
Jack On 3/5/16, 6:09 AM, "Alan Conway" <[email protected]> wrote: >On Fri, 2016-03-04 at 20:17 +0000, Gordon Sim wrote: >> On 04/03/16 20:09, Alan Conway wrote: >> > I'm not crazy about 'treatment' but please not "type" or "class". >> > They >> > are horribly over-used and are reserved words in many contexts, the >> > AMQP management spec is just one. >> >> They are used a lot (I wouldn't say 'over-used' myself) because >> categorising things is such a common and vital requirement. > >Exactly why words like "type", "category", "sort", "kind", "class" etc. >should be weapons of last resort. Most things can be categorized along >multiple dimensions: a multicast route is a type of route, a direct >route is a type of route. So I prefer path, direction, treatment, >distribution etc. that hint at what type of type you are specifying. > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
