Hhhm, is it naming conventions that people have a problem with or the implication of policing? These can be separated. I don’t see a downside to promoting conventions.
It also seems that some of the reason (e.g., that we have metadata is based on an assumption that we will have good metadata). But I recall a lot of resistance to requiring basic metadata. I believe this merits a little more discussion and would like to nudge behavior if possible, though not compel it. We could do this by simply providing a skeleton taxonomy into which people could always just through things in “misc” or some equivalent. > On Jul 27, 2016, at 12:57 PM, Robin Sommer <ro...@icir.org> wrote: > > Make it four. :) I'm with Seth, too, better not to enforce any naming > scheme because the boundaries are unclear. Also, note that a single > binary Bro plugin can provide multiple quite different things (say, a > reader and an analyzer and a packet source all at the same time, if > one so desires :). > > Also agree with Johanna: the username is part of the package name if I > follow correctly, so there's disambiguation there. > > I have some more feeback on the package manager and Jon's questions > starting this thread, will send soon. > > Robin > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 09:15 -0700, you wrote: > >> And to add a me three to this - I am also with him on this one. On top >> of things - I might misremember this, but didn't we plan package names >> to include the github user name at one point of time? So a package name >> would be user/redis, for example, and there also could be user2/redis? >> >> Johanna >> >> On 27 Jul 2016, at 9:05, Matthias Vallentin wrote: >> >>>> I actually don't like this that much because some of these can cross >>>> boundaries and do all sorts of different things in a single plugin. >>>> It makes more sense to me to leave the naming open. >>> >>> I'm with Seth on this one. The reason why I think we should keep the >>> naming open is that it's the job of the meta data tags to take care of >>> the grouping. If someone writes a redis package, then they should >>> apply >>> the redis package. Encoding this meta data into the package name is >>> quite limited, however. >>> >>> Matthias >>> _______________________________________________ >>> bro-dev mailing list >>> bro-dev@bro.org >>> http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev >> _______________________________________________ >> bro-dev mailing list >> bro-dev@bro.org >> http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev >> > > > -- > Robin Sommer * ICSI/LBNL * ro...@icir.org * www.icir.org/robin > _______________________________________________ > bro-dev mailing list > bro-dev@bro.org > http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev _______________________________________________ bro-dev mailing list bro-dev@bro.org http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev