After some investigation about how to layout the relationships among the children modules, I thought it would be better to do the split after RC2 when we get PKINIT fully implemented and thus have clearer ideas for the kerby-pkix module.
So for now I only removed the commons-ssl library from the module as cleanup to prepare for the RC2 release. Thanks. Regards, Kai -----Original Message----- From: Emmanuel Lécharny [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 11:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Reconsider how to layout kerby-pkix Le 30/12/15 13:52, Zheng, Kai a écrit : > Thanks for the comment Emmanuel. > >>> I would drop the 'pkix-' prefix, assuming the modules will be under the >>> pkix module anyway > I understand this sounds good in a style (used by Directory main), though > Kerby goes in the other, you might check it in the kerby-kerb module and see > its children. The style is often seen in other projects, and hard to say > which one is better, but one rational for the Kerby style is, the child > module may be separately referenced and mentioned by other projects as > standalone library so out of the parent context. So I would suggest we use > the style consistently. no problem at all. Go for kerby-xxx.
