Could we not start reevaluating the very core of the design, and perhaps (I know, I want a lot...) just agree on the solution that has already been implemented, even if suboptimal?
While we shake our heads at CEE changing things, we discuss exactly the same thing here....
I think the prefix is probably worth considering, maybe system_* being kind of protected. On the other hand, I could also live with the current field list and protect it. The bottom line is that with a prefix, we can protect future fields whereas we cannot with the field list (for obvious reasons ;)).
I am ready to make this change. I also think we should stick with the rest of the implementation and let it evolve in the future (except maybe for the cookie, for reasons outlined in other mail).
In any case, if we want protection, we need to define what this protection is. A simple approach (aka "quickly to patch") is to disallow overwrites to the protected set AND give the user the capability to override that.
Rainer
(I'm quite willing to prepare patches to Fedora-relevant components to get the field names changed to whatever the consensus is - once more. A second change would make me very grumpy.) Mirek _______________________________________________ lumberjack-developers mailing list lumberjack-developers@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/lumberjack-developers