Exactly the kind of discussion that *doesn’t* need to be on jboss-migration-team. There is nothing confidential here, probably nothing internal. I would move this to windup-dev… > On 27 May 2015, at 03:06, Ondrej Zizka <ozizka(a)redhat.com > <mailto:ozizka@redhat.com>> wrote: > > (19:45:09) LincolnThree: *ok guys/gal, let's discuss rule ID syntax > (ozizka, jsightler, sgilda)* > (19:45:15) LincolnThree: we need a standard > (19:45:23) sgilda: yes, we do > (19:45:45) LincolnThree: I think we have a few things to consider: > (19:45:48) LincolnThree: 1) uniqueness > (19:45:51) LincolnThree: 2) descriptiveness > (19:45:58) LincolnThree: anything else? > (19:46:06) LincolnThree: 3) searchability > (19:46:39) LincolnThree: or we can discuss this tomorrow during the > meeting. > > Sorry, I missed that conversation. > My view: > > 1) Uniqueness, no doubt. > 2) Decriptiveness - to a minimal level. It will be useful when > getting user feedback (bugs, I suspect :) > > So that when something goes wrong and the user will send the > stacktrace, we will know what rule caused it right away. > > 3) Searchability - I'd rely on metadata for searches. > > Additionally, an ID could contain the main source and target technology. > > > E.g. "weblogic>eap:asynchbeans.Work-6bcvk" for > > <rule id="weblogic>eap:asynchbeans.Work-6bcvk"> > <when> > <javaclass > references="com.ibm.websphere.asynchbeans.Work" as="default"> > <location>INHERITANCE</location> > </javaclass> > </when> >