Yeah, that's a fair point. We have tons of internal code which still
uses the vigil namespace. It is temping to clean up the cruft however.
Assuming there is enough code not pushed upstream into NOX out there,
I am personally against name changes like this. The last time someone
changed secchan to ofprotocol in OpenFlow, too much work results.
Unless someone volunteer to update everyone's code to the new
namespace, I see no reason why such a change should be made.
Regards
KK
On 21 February 2010 18:15, Martin Casado <[email protected]> wrote:
That would be fantastic. Yes, vigil is purely vestigial.
IIRC, all of the "namespace vigil" references are historical and
outdated -- is that correct? Is there any reason not to wholesale
replace vigil with 'nox'?
The current name causes some confusion in the source code.
I can do the honors if people agree that it's a good idea.
- Rob
.
_______________________________________________
nox-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org
_______________________________________________
nox-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org
_______________________________________________
nox-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://noxrepo.org/mailman/listinfo/nox-dev_noxrepo.org
