On Fri, 11 May 2007, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
You're right, but - That's a tools problem only. The user wont see it, wheras the users sees the project names and structures.
If you see it as a tools problem, than it doesn't make much difference, if it's a ':' or a '/' as it's up to the user interface how to present that.
The way the API presents and handles the names is a tool's problem. The naming of the projects not, as this is presented to the user.
- It's the same for Unix filesystems. You also do not know if /foo/bar is a directory or a file. So in this sense it is consistent.
It might be consistent with filesystems, but it would add complexity to implementations and the API. So I'm not sure that consistency is really beneficial.
I don't see that additional complexity really. For the client side sending a request there is no difference and for the other side handling the request its merely xxx/yyy/zzz/... if existsproject(xxx/yyy/zzz) then handle...(project xxx/yyy/zzz) else handle...(package xxx/yyy/zzz) A switch of equal type must already be there for the current implementation. Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org