Naming System for Regions - Active Jira Question

Hello everyone, I’ve recently gotten into the Geode community and have been looking for a good place to start contributing. I found this Jira regarding Duplicate Region names (Geode-6286

Re: Naming System for Regions - Active Jira Question

I added the comment on this issue: Geode region names ARE case sensitive. Should not fix. On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:51 AM Alex Grisham wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I’ve recently gotten into the Geode community and have been looking for a > good place to start contributing. I found this Jira reg

Re: Naming System for Regions - Active Jira Question

I went ahead and closed out the ticket as "won't fix". Below is my explanation: Changing region names to not be case sensitive would break backwards compatibility for existing users. It's better for a given user to devise a standard naming scheme for regions to avoid any issues caused by trying to

Re: Naming System for Regions - Active Jira Question

Sorry, Alex! Pick another :) On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 3:39 PM Kirk Lund wrote: > I went ahead and closed out the ticket as "won't fix". Below is my > explanation: > > Changing region names to not be case sensitive would break backwards > compatibility for existing users. It's better for a given u

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC 0: Lightweight RFC Process

@Dan, Thank you for your first attempt at this. Maybe we should be a rename "Active" to "Completed". "Active" to me means that we are currently working on them, rather having completed them. I don't view these proposals as features that can be toggled on/off (or active/inactive). Also, I di

Re: Naming System for Regions - Active Jira Question

Changing the case sensitivity might break existing users' apps that use Geode. -- Mike Stolz Principal Engineer, Pivotal Cloud Cache Mobile: +1-631-835-4771 On Mon, Jul 15, 2019, 6:24 PM Jinmei Liao wrote: > I added the comment on this issue: Geode region names ARE case sensitive. > Should not

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC 0: Lightweight RFC Process

@Udo I like both of your suggestions. Most of the proposals that I put in "Dropped" still seemed like good ideas, perhaps even things we'd already agreed to on the mailing list, but hadn't seen any recent development. If no one objects, I'll go ahead and rename Active->Completed and Dropped->Iceb

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC 0: Lightweight RFC Process

Hi Dan, > RFC Process > ? I’d like the language to match. For stuff that has been implemented, I like Implemented, but Completed is also fine. Do we have a way to identify proposals for things that are intended to be on