<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - support for digital signatures"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16770#c86">Comment # 86</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - support for digital signatures"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16770">bug 16770</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:ralph-freedesktop@inputplus.co.uk" title="Ralph Corderoy <ralph-freedesktop@inputplus.co.uk>"> <span class="fn">Ralph Corderoy</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Albert Astals Cid from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=16770#c82">comment #82</a>)
<span class="quote">> > - Is '-c' the best option name for "don't perform certificate validation"?
>
> Honestly i don't think spending much time on discussing the option name
> makes much sense, we just need to document it properly and that's it.</span >
It's vital to put thought into "naming things" before a poor decision becomes
permanent because it becomes public. At the very least, "-c" suggests check
and "-C" would often be the negative don't check, even if no -c option exists
because it's the default.
And then there's the issue Adrian raises.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>