On Tuesday 12 February 2008 15.31:54 Adam Thornton wrote: > On Feb 12, 2008, at 2:26 AM, Kern Sibbald wrote: > > One hash is not possible without seriously restricting user's > > flexibility -- > > the MD5 field though not totally used as planned in 2.2. (hopefully > > it will > > be in 2.2) is a critical field for security and certain government > > legal > > requirements for the storage of data. > > If we still have some design flexibility, how about we *don't* call it > the "MD5" field?
It is a lot of work to change a database field name. It isn't just a simple change the name, recompile and we are done as is the case with C/C++ variable names. It requires a modification of the database schemas, a database update (a lot of work), ... > > Something like the "cryptographic hash" field? Too long to have readable code, and spaces are not permitted in names. :-) > That way we don't have > the completely predictable annoyance and confusion when we *do* end up > using sha256 or something other than MD5 as the hash. When you set it in the FileSet resource. Kern ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
