If I could toss in my 2c -

Could you rather keep the extension the same: i.e.
"passwords.security_file", and "allow.security_file"
or something?

I have had issues with refactoring and being unable to specify an
extension-based wildcard to include these files...

Then again, I could easily include "*.allow" and "*.passwords", I
suppose.

Sure, Dan, you have my +1 to rename these files to include an
extension.



On Fri, February 18, 2011 10:19, Dan Haywood wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Currently our simple file security module (authentication and
> authorization) uses the file "passwords" to hold user/pwd combos, and
> the file "allow" to specify whitelist authorization.
>
> I'm currently working on the archetype, and generating it from
> support/prototype using mvn archetype:create-from-project.  I've noticed
> that the generated archetype-metadata.xml does not include these files,
> because it expects all files to have an extension.
>
> I therefore propose that we rename "passwords" to
> "security_file.passwords", and "allow" to "security_file.allow".  This
> should solve my problem, and I also think is an improvement in that it
> fits better with our naming of properties files, and shows which module
> uses these files.
>
> If there are any objections, let me know here.

-- 
Kevin Meyer, Ph.D., Pr.Sci.Nat.          http://www.kmz.co.za/
Sharon Park, Nigel, South Africa.
Cell: +27(0)83 346 3045


Reply via email to