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
The top level name property in an op.yml file isn't currently used for anything at runtime and causes confusion when compared to an op ref. It's also generally extra boilerplate the people (including me) forget to update, as most of the time it matches the name of the containing directory if the op is defined in an .opspec directory.
The use case of documentation for a human is provided by the description field.
I think the op ref is more useful in most cases, since it's what someone must know in order to use an op.
Removing the name field is easy (7e86c43) and can be backwards compatible by marking it optional and deprecated in the json schema.
💥 Proposal
The top level
name
property in anop.yml
file isn't currently used for anything at runtime and causes confusion when compared to an op ref. It's also generally extra boilerplate the people (including me) forget to update, as most of the time it matches the name of the containing directory if the op is defined in an.opspec
directory.The use case of documentation for a human is provided by the
description
field.I think the op ref is more useful in most cases, since it's what someone must know in order to use an op.
Removing the name field is easy (7e86c43) and can be backwards compatible by marking it optional and deprecated in the json schema.
Related: #634 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: