On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 10:37:10AM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > I disagree; `water' seems like a great name. > > If it were a word that referred to common activity, then it might be > considered too generic, but it's not. > > It seems very unlikely that there will be other packages competing for > the name, and if someday there are, well, they can easily choose others. > In cases like this, I think the rule should be `first-come-first-serve.'
I disagree. The policy is to avoid namespace polution, which means that package names should be as specific as possible. Imagine if the first 26 packages were named a through z, just because they could be and they were first come first served? Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
