activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: AMQP 1.0 connection property names
Date Tue, 13 May 2014 19:25:37 GMT
Sending again, this time remembering to hit reply-all to keep both lists as
recipients...


On 13 May 2014 17:59, Justin Ross <jross@apache.org> wrote:

> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Gordon Sim <gsim@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > My only comment around the actual names is that 'process' doesnt
> >> immediately make me think 'name' and even seems a little like it could
> be
> >> describing the same thing as 'pid' if you didnt know both properties
> >> existed, which I have always thought about the older versions too. That
> >> isn't to say I necessarily have a good alternative suggestion, the only
> >> short one I could think of was 'pname' :)
> >>
> >
> > 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.

(replying to Justin's mail because I haven't received Gordon's one yet!)


>
> Out of curiosity, is there any interest in offering the command line (a la
> "process_command_line")?  The arguments passed to a process can often be
> used to distinguish it from others quickly.
>

That might open up some issues, requiring consideration if anything on the
command line needs sanitized.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message