<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
On 06/14/2018 08:08 AM, Brian Bouterse wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAAcvrTGi4G=SOtK8X2OwqnNuVOvhQ8FTq0gQqsg-Pnj3j8z+Sg@mail.gmail.com">
<div>Jeff, can you elaborate more on your -1. I want to understand
it. I'm struggling to appreciate an "it's a convention" argument
without sources like an RFC or similar. I don't believe internet
articles are credible sources because any viewpoint can be
validated by an internet post.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
RFCs typically define standards not conventions. Agreed on internet
articles being available to support most any viewpoint. FWIW, I
didn't introduce the aforementioned article. Conventions are
typically establish through example. IMHO, most articles,
tutorials, textbooks, etc use ID (or TABLE_ID) for the primary key.
Also, this convention has been applied on <i>every</i> project I
have worked on. <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAAcvrTGi4G=SOtK8X2OwqnNuVOvhQ8FTq0gQqsg-Pnj3j8z+Sg@mail.gmail.com">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>To recap my interests here, it's about being responsive to
the community. We ask plugin writers for feedback and from two
independent plugin writers (not me) we received feedback that
this name wasn't ideal. I want us to be responsive to that. It's
not only because I think their technical feedback is legit
(albeit small), but also because it's our strategy during the
beta/RC of Pulp3 core is to make adjustments based on plugin
writer feedback. To receive feedback and choose to not follow
the recommendation they suggested feels like not the way I want
to interact with plugin writers. This is my main concern with
not making a change in this area.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
I am sensitive to plugin writer requests but changing the name of
the primary key field for every table in the core because 2 plugin
writers said that it "wasn't ideal" seems rash. I'm not convinced
that this is a correctness concern but rather a minor inconvenience
for what seems like (so far) a small percentage of plugins. Plugin
writers will always need to contend with naming conflicts and I
believe the plugin is the proper place to resolve them. I also want
to be responsive to feedback but I think it's reasonable for the
answer to be "no" when the request is not in the best interest of
the project as a whole.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>