Henry B. Hotz wrote:
> On May 1, 2007, at 1:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> I would call them "gss" and "gss-sec". Or possibly "gss-enc". I think
>>> that's a lot more clear than "gss-np" (something ending with -sec is a
>>> giveaway)
>> +1
> If we settle on gss-np and gss-sec is that a good compromise?

I still think the "-np" part is unclear - it's not "easily guessable
without reading the documentation", unless you're already familiar with it.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to