[Bro-Dev] New proposal (Re: CBAN naming)

Robin Sommer robin at icir.org
Mon Jun 6 20:46:48 PDT 2016

So sounds like this proposal is something you can agree with?

On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 02:01 +0000, you wrote:

> So scripts do not autoload, but plugins do?

Thinking more about that I would answer: yes. Going back to the
principle of least surprise, this is how it is now as well: scripts
need to be loaded, plugins load automatically. I suggest we start like
that, we can always add an auto-load mechanism later if it turns out
that would be useful.

> And if the process isn’t the same in both cases, is that also in
> conflict w/ the goal of a developer being able to promote a
> script-only thing into a binary plugin without users noticing?

Isn't that more about moving some functionality, like bifs? I don't
think a plugin would replace the scripts completely.

> To mock up example documentation:

I like this, with the one note that most likely they won't need to
fill out any additional meta data fields in (2) and (3) because the
defaults will do.

> That all looks consistent except part (2) ends up pointing people
> toward existing docs/examples that reference “package” but with a
> different meaning.  I'd need a decision to be made about how/whether
> to change that.

Ok, then let's rename "package" in the current docs. I propose
"module" as the replacement: it's not quite right regarding the
language's module concept but close enough I would say.

> naming the project/client/containers

My vote: Bro Package Manager, bro-pkgs, package. 


Robin Sommer * ICSI/LBNL * robin at icir.org * www.icir.org/robin

More information about the bro-dev mailing list