Re: HTTP::Request::Form and TreeBuilder.pm (fwd)

[Paul J. Lucas]

On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Chris Nandor wrote:

> You are arguing at one time against confusion,

        I'm not arguing anything.  I never started this whole argument.

> but here you are advocating more confusion, by changing the names of
> established distributions.  Yes, it is a problem that his distribution and
> module name don't match.

        So essentially I'm being asked to pay for his mistake of
        misnaming his module/distribution ...

> But many people have come to know and expect it.

        ... and the module-powers-that-be for not catching his mistake
        way back when and asking him to fix it.

> I think the most reasonable solution is to have a dummy HTML::Tree module in
> his distribution, thereby unifying the name with the distribution.

        Reasonable?  Who knows.  How about biting the bullet for the
        "right" solution even if it means short-term confusion and
        pain?

        The "right" solution, IMHO, is to unify the two
        modules/distributions into a single, fast, efficient one.  The
        reason I invented my own and didn't use his in the first place
        was that his API is not as elegant as it could be (IMHO) and
        not very fast.

        If a unification happens, people will eventually deal with it.

        - Paul