tworkACL
> is already used to for items within the List). Now naming the API
> NetworkACLList / Group / Container, when you expand, all of them are
> equally redundant.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Prasanna Santhanam [mailto:t...@apache.org]
> > Sent
Preferred API name is NetworkACL, which cannot be used (NetworkACL is already
used to for items within the List). Now naming the API NetworkACLList / Group /
Container, when you expand, all of them are equally redundant.
> -Original Message-
> From: Prasanna Santhanam [ma
ity.
I was talking about the new API (NetworkACLList) that groups the
NetworkACLs. We can always rename that to something sensible before it
gets out and we think about backward compat issues.
--
Prasanna.,
Powered by BigRock.com
...@citrix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 7:40 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: networkACLList
+1 to this .
Sounds more logical and easy to differentiate from an end user perspective as
we are actually creating a container/group of acl rules there.
-Original Message-
From
Subject: networkACLList
Isn't it redundant to call the API create/list/delete (NetworkACLList)
That expands to create/list/delete-NetworkAccessControlListList?
Should that be a Group/Container instead?
Thanks,
--
Prasanna.,
Powered by BigRock.com
Isn't it redundant to call the API create/list/delete (NetworkACLList)
That expands to create/list/delete-NetworkAccessControlListList?
Should that be a Group/Container instead?
Thanks,
--
Prasanna.,
Powered by BigRock.com
