Could we not start reevaluating the very core of the design, and
perhaps (I know, I want a lot...) just agree on the solution that has
already been implemented, even if suboptimal?
While we shake our heads at CEE changing things, we discuss exactly the
same thing here....
I think the prefix is probably worth considering, maybe system_* being kind of protected.
On the other hand, I could also live with the current field list and protect it. The
bottom line is that with a prefix, we can protect future fields whereas we cannot with the
field list (for obvious reasons ;)).
I am ready to make this change. I also think we should stick with the rest of the
implementation and let it evolve in the future (except maybe for the cookie, for reasons
outlined in other mail).
In any case, if we want protection, we need to define what this protection is. A simple
approach (aka "quickly to patch") is to disallow overwrites to the protected set
AND give the user the capability to override that.
Rainer
(I'm quite willing to prepare patches to Fedora-relevant
components to
get the field names changed to whatever the consensus is - once more.
A second change would make me very grumpy.)
Mirek
_______________________________________________
lumberjack-developers mailing list
lumberjack-developers(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/lumberjack-developers