[PATCH] add documentation about backend naming for VMOD authors

[Poul-Henning Kamp]

--------
In message <CABoVN9BkxDU1=1p4QPzS84BCeFEXOKSEwbLWRiwEPdXpq1jUSg at mail.gmail.com>, Dridi Bouke
lmoune writes:

>> Or we could move it out to a more comprehensive doc about namespaces,
>> but that will take some work (and I'm not sure what all it would have to
>> cover).
>
>We had sort-of started a discussion on IRC at some point about that,
>but there's no way AFAIK to enforce namespaces.

Without being to philosophical about it, enforcing namespaces is always a
bad idea, unless that is the only way to know which namespace you are
dealing with.

A good example of this is towns with a namesuffix which identifies them
as towns (Karlstadt, New York City, Rødby) because there might be confusion
otherwise, but we don't insist that all towns have such suffixes.

But I think we will have to think about and document objects and their
names and lifetimes in VMOD context RSN, because it's getting complicated.

The VMOD_PRIV thing ties heavily into this, (and maybe we should
really create backends as VMOD_PRIV's to unify these concerns.)


But that reminds me:  What was the consensus on my proposal for .%d suffix
for colliding backend names ?

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.