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