You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Making sure to leave a note re: @carnal0wnage and I's discussion last night re: conventions.
Background: Now that we have both GCP and AWS functionality we might have a situation where a method is named the same between the two. So imagine a GCP method named module_do_something and an AWS module named module_do_something. This would be less than ideal.
So going forward, our thoughts were to do one of the following:
module_aws_do_something and module_gcp_do_something (prepending module_<cloudservice
aws/module_do_something and gcp/module_do_something
Anyways, recording this conversation in case we need to figure out later why we chose whatever convention we go with (which - I believe we're leaning towards module_aws_ or module_gcp_ 👍
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Making sure to leave a note re: @carnal0wnage and I's discussion last night re: conventions.
Background: Now that we have both GCP and AWS functionality we might have a situation where a method is named the same between the two. So imagine a GCP method named
module_do_something
and an AWS module namedmodule_do_something
. This would be less than ideal.So going forward, our thoughts were to do one of the following:
module_aws_do_something
andmodule_gcp_do_something
(prependingmodule_<cloudservice
aws/module_do_something
andgcp/module_do_something
Anyways, recording this conversation in case we need to figure out later why we chose whatever convention we go with (which - I believe we're leaning towards
module_aws_
ormodule_gcp_
👍The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: