On Fri, Dec 17, 2004 at 04:41:51PM -0800, Justin Mason wrote: > > makes sense to me. I'd (a) expand the doco, and (b) use a better > name than "verify_user" for the method, as it took a while for me > to grok it. > > rather than "verify_user", how's about "service_acl_allows_username" or > similar? >
Opps, missed the whole what this thing does blurb in the POD. I'm horrible at naming things, how about "services_allowed_for_username"? Michael
pgput1D9IYczT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
