Charles d'Avernas

@tsurdilo yes, exactly: `{namespace}.{functionName}`

Events, functions, authentications, retries and timeouts. For states, that makes less sense imho considering the ability to call subflows. So only those should be cobsidered "resources" imo

No it should be for everything imo. There is no difference anyways.

You can define a grpc function def with authRef

It's defined in the external resource, as you would right now. It's just moved out the wf doc and into the external res, possibly with its referenced auths

The whole point is to be able to have multiple namespaces, so a top level ns property is not gonna help, or I'm not getting what you mean.

No, it's meant to import multiple namespaces at the same time. For instance, myGreetingApp's and myLoggingApp's. And that has imo nothing to do with extensions, namespace is not the feature...

Plus, extension is what it is: duct and tape. Makes your definitions suddenly non portable, thus going against SW core principles

> I think the namespace separator should be : not . (basically because : is less likely to be part of a function name than .) @fjtirado Hmmm, not fan...

@tsurdilo I disagree TO. I believe we are actually just moving from a theoretical spec to an implemented one. During implementation, I believe we discover limitations/issues otherwise unseen. Not addressing...