I don't object, but one thing that strikes me as a little odd with the original names was the use of both '.' and '_' as separators (qpid.client_pid vs qpid.client.pid).
Now I don't know what conventions these names are supposed to follow, but my best guess would be that '.' should be used for separating namespaces and '_' for separating words in a compound phrase. In this case I can see it both ways, but if you think there might be other process related things in the future then it might be worth thinking of process as a namespace and going with process.name and process.id. --Rafael On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Gordon Sim <[email protected]> wrote: > On 05/13/2014 08:25 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > >> On 13 May 2014 17:59, Justin Ross <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Gordon Sim <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> How about process_name and process_id then? >>>> >>> >>> >>> I like those. I don't think brevity is important in this case, and those >>> names are very clear to me. >>> >>> >> Works for me too. >> > > Ok, does anyone object to process_name and process_id? > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
