From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: Do xml-like namespaces make sense for Reiser4? (re: metas thread) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 11:28:59 -0700 Message-ID: <407C316B.80606@namesys.com> References: <407AB9AE.3060801@pobox.com> <407ADCBF.8000609@namesys.com> <407AEA05.50004@pobox.com> <407BFBEA.5010006@pobox.com> <407C15D9.1080705@namesys.com> <407C1BE9.8010509@pobox.com> <407C279A.3060303@namesys.com> <407C3004.3070401@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <407C3004.3070401@pobox.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: "John D. Heintz" Cc: reiserfs-list@namesys.com John D. Heintz wrote: > Hans Reiser wrote: > >> John D. Heintz wrote: >> >>> Hans Reiser wrote: >>> >>> Let me verify something: You are suggesting that the "metas" >>> namespace be the entry point for all of the plugin namespaces? I had >>> assumed that each plugin would create it's own. That does certainly >>> reduce the scope of my problem. >> >> >> >> It can use metas, but what it does is up to it. metas is a style >> convention. >> > Okay, that is what I thought originally. That still means that user > defined names and plugin defined names can in general conflict though. > >> >> this is the beauty of there being an official maintainer for reiserfs >> to handle such issues;-) >> > I would have been much happier to hear some strategy would enable > plugins names to disambiguate themselves from each other and user > defined names. In practice you might be right that a few dozen plugins > can be "officially" integrated without too much trouble. Also, this > issue could be dealt with later as well - I don't think now is the > only opportunity for addressing it. > >> plugins are not created as easily as files;-), there will be few >> enough that I can manage the issue as it happens >> > Yes, in the short to medium term you are probably right that you can > deal with these issues as they happen. I'd like there to be some > better way of dealing with resolving conflicts from unified namespaces > then always "ask Hans". > > Does some sort of syntactic shorthand actually break the set theoretic > naming system rules? Or is this just something you view as needless > complexity? precisely what syntactic shorthand? > > Thanks for the replies, > > John Heintz > > > -- Hans