> Bundle::Installer sounds like a strange name to me. How does it fit
> with the description in the module list:
>
> Bundle i Namespace reserved for modules collections ANDK
>
> Could you describe your intentions with it a little?
The system consists of four modules and an exectuable, whose current names
are:
Installer::Base - base class for package modules
Installer::Manifest - manifest object
Installer::Rule - simple object for handling "rules" (a rule here is
defined as a group of regexes which matches against a list of strings
Installer::Ruleset - a simple object for handling a list of rules and
actions associated with those rules
rkit - executable perl script
Which is why I chose Bundle::Installer. I guess I'm unclear what is meant
by "modules collections". Since these modules are meant to be used only
with each other, perhaps they should they not be in the Bundle:: namespace?
The internal name that we use for this package is simply 'rkit'. Perhaps
App::Rkit would be better? I'll defer to better judgement here.
To be honest, I'm not sure if this belongs in the modules section or not.
The modules included are primarily there to support the rkit executable and
are not extremely reuseable (I could see Manifest, Rule and Ruleset possibly
being reused, but definitely not Base).
What it boils down to is this: suggestions are 100% welcome. It will
probably be a couple of weeks anyway before the legal department gives the
go ahead to upload it, so fire away.
Thanks,
Anthony Payne
PETsMART.com
