Joseph Kowalski wrote:
> Mark Shellenbaum wrote:
>>>
>>> Why SUNW Rather than org.opensolaris as the prefix ? The latter
>>> would IMO be more appropriate today given these are OpenSolaris
>>> specific rather than "Sun Microsystems Inc" specific.
>>>
>>
>> The SUNW prefix was chosen because of some wording in fsattr(5) which
>> states that the SUNW prefix would be used for Sun specific
>> attributes. I'm fine with changing it to the following if you feel
>> strongly about it.
>>
>> OPENSOLARISattr_rw, and OPENSOLARISattr_ro
>>
>> If we do this change then then fsattr(5) man page would need to be
>> updated to include the OPENSOLARIS prefix.
> Just my two cents on naming.
>
> If we start using OPENSOLARIS rather than SUNW, people will wonder
> what is different. The only point of either
> of these is to partition the namespace.
>
> We chose SUNW in a day where the players we were concerned about all
> had Stock Symbols, but even that was
> poor because it ignored foreign exchanges (which may collide). IMHO,
> this was never a good idea, but we did it.
> In retrospect, perhaps a product oriented name would have been better
> - SOLARIS or SUNOS - but that's water
> long under the bridge.
>
> My point is that unless the letters SUNW cause anybody serious grief,
> we should just continue with their use and
> just write it off to history should anybody question it. More names,
> with equivalent meanings, don't do us much good.
+1
Further, if we go down this trend, are we going to have to start
changing all those old SUNW packages, etc. Yikes, I hope not.
Also, I find the reverse DNS naming scheme dissatisfying ... it makes
everything quite a bit longer than it really needs to be to provide the
separation of the namespace that is desired. It also ignores the bit
that not everyone who wants to participate will have a DNS domain name,
or that the domainname will not change over time. (E.g. due to mergers,
buyouts, insolvency, or rebranding.)
-- Garrett
