20 messages in ru.sysoev.nginxRe: New SSL features for Nginx.
FromSent OnAttachments
Brice FigureauJul 21, 2009 11:01 am 
Igor SysoevJul 22, 2009 1:43 am 
Brice FigureauJul 22, 2009 3:21 am 
Brice FigureauJul 22, 2009 4:39 am 
Igor SysoevJul 22, 2009 5:15 am 
Igor SysoevJul 22, 2009 7:52 am.optional
Brice FigureauJul 22, 2009 10:15 am 
Brice FigureauJul 22, 2009 10:20 am 
Igor SysoevJul 22, 2009 11:38 am 
Igor SysoevJul 22, 2009 11:42 am 
Brice FigureauJul 22, 2009 12:13 pm 
Igor SysoevJul 22, 2009 12:23 pm 
Brice FigureauJul 22, 2009 2:17 pm 
Tom KeyserJul 22, 2009 5:50 pm 
Glen LumanauJul 22, 2009 5:59 pm 
Edward MiddletonJul 22, 2009 7:26 pm 
Cliff WellsJul 22, 2009 8:22 pm 
Igor SysoevJul 23, 2009 12:08 am 
Igor SysoevJul 23, 2009 12:56 am.crl
Brice FigureauJul 23, 2009 4:32 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:Re: New SSL features for Nginx.Actions...
From:Cliff Wells (cli@develix.com)
Date:Jul 22, 2009 8:22:30 pm
List:ru.sysoev.nginx

On Thu, 2009-07-23 at 11:26 +0900, Edward Middleton wrote:

Igor Sysoev wrote:

Brice Figureau wrote:

Will you merge the CRL one (feel free to rewrite it if you prefer), too ?

Yes, the single issue is name of directive: ssl_crl. Should it be longer and more expressive ? Apache has SSLCARevocationFile.

I think the original argument is better. Anyone who uses a CRL[1] is going to know what it is. If you call the command something else they have to search the manual to find out what you have chosen to called it. In my opinion it would be better to call it ssl_crl_file so that it is obvious it expects a file path.

I agree with this reasoning. Making the name longer isn't going to reduce the need to refer to the documentation and "crl" seems to be the key word people will be searching for.

Cliff

-- http://www.google.com/search?q=vonage+sucks