"Lex Spoon" <lex at cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> goran.krampe at bluefish.se wrote:
> > In short - if we start to have "name based" references INSIDE the SM
> > model (which IMHO this is - the dependency model should be inside SM
> > otherwise we will not be able to work with it) then we immediately need
> > to add a lot of smarts to make it work. It is simply not KISS anymore.
> 
> 
> Why would it not be KISS?   UUID's are just names that you are
> promising not to change.  What extra smarts are you envisioning?

Well, see my other post for more but in short:
- Oh, the names are immutable? That makes it simpler I agree. But I
don't want that.
- The names must be ensured to be unique on creation. Needs either a
namespace implementation of some kind or network communication with a
central entity. The UUIDs can be created offline and in a distributed
fashion (which is what I am planning, the current centralized setup was
just to get this rolling)

> As an existence proof, Debian gets along quite well with name+version.

But they have smarts I assume (how do they handle renames?) and they are
not distributed I guess.
 
> Lex

regards, Göran