meta_header or note?

On 10/12/2012 08:25 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:
>> OK, so here is the summary of the required changes for the proposed
>> meta_header patch:
>>
>> 1. Rename proposed "meta_header" directive to "note".
>> 2. Rename proposed "%meta_header" logformat code to "%note".
>> 3. Enforce restrictions on characters in keys if not already
>> enforced.
>
> +1.

We need more opinions on naming:

* Christos thinks "meta_header" is better than "note" (because some
annotations are sent as meta headers in ICAP; we already have
adaptation_meta; and annotations are going to be represented as headers
internally).

* Amos thinks that "meta_header" is too confusing (because folks would
think that this header is being injected into the traffic stream and
because not all annotations are sent as [meta] headers).

What do you think?

Thank you,

Alex.
Received on Sat Oct 13 2012 - 04:28:45 MDT