[TYPO3-ect] Your opinions upon keyname

[Jean-Baptiste Rio]

Hi,

Elmar Hinz wrote:
> Hello girls,
> 
> the first part of our common ECT library, the link class works pretty
> fine and has passed a lot of tests. Before anybody can work with it
> she want's security upon the persistance of registration key. Also to
> write documentation I would like to know the final keyname.
> 
> Still we have not come to a solution that is carried by a broad conset
> of ECT supporters. So please bring in your opinion.
> 
> Variant A: ect
> Variant B: ext
> Variant C: ect_div + ect_lib
> Variant D: div + lib
> 
> Details:
> 
> Variant A: ect
> A.1) With own namespace:    ect_div::somewhat(),    class: ect_link
> A.2) Without own namespace: tx_ect_div::somewhat(), class: tx_ect_link
> 
> Variant B: ext
> B.1) With own namespace:    ext_div::somewhat(),    class: ext_link
> B.2) Without own namespace: tx_ext_div::somewhat(), class: tx_ext_link
> 
> Variant C: ect_div + ect_lib
> C.1) WON:  ect_div::somewhat(),   class: ect_lib_link
> C.2) WOON: tx_ectdiv::somewhat(), class: tx_ectlib_link
> 
> Variant D: div + lib
> D) WOON: tx_div::somewhat(), class: tx_lib_link
> 
> 
> Hoping that you will bring this towards a good decision now. Please
> take in account that the names you will use should be short and easy
> to remember.
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Elmar
> 
> 

Sorry, is it a sort of special "blond girl" subject ? Because i can't 
see any major difference with the "naming convention" suject. Or am I a 
blond girl if i can't see any difference ? ;) (No offense to blond girl, 
they're so sweet...)

Regards,

JB