>>>>> On Thu, 3 May 2001 12:31:29 -0700, Robert Lehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 03:22:02PM +0200, Andreas J. Koenig wrote:
>> >>>>> On Thu, 3 May 2001 04:25:55 +0200, "Perl Authors Upload Server"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> > The following module was proposed for inclusion in the Module List:
>>
>> > modid: NPAdmin
>> > DSLI: adpO
>> > description: Perl API to query printers via SNMP.
>>
>> What about SNMP::NPAdmin? We have already 8 modules by 3 authors in
>> the SNMP:: namespace. Seems like a good place to me.
>>
>> --
>> andreas
> That's seems very sensible. Normally, I would wholeheartedly accept your
> suggestion. I might have thought of it myself if I didn't have a compelling
> motive for my original suggestion for the module's name.
> But the name 'SNMP::NPAdmin' seems to counterstroke my first suggestion because
> I want a direct correlation between original program's name, 'npadmin,' and the
> module's name that I proposed, 'NPAdmin.'
Over the years we have defended the Rootnamespace territory with knife
and fire in order
- to keep the lib/ root directory tidy
- help people to associate at least a tiny something with a module's name
- overcome the mentality of developers who consider two-letter
acronyms appropriate in this diversifying world of software. Nobody
can keep in mind what two-letter acronyms stand for.
- reserve rootnamespace for later use when people have ideas for
modules that need a couple of namespaces and a rootlevel namespace
is urgently needed to pull the group together.
The reasoning is still there, but knife and fire are worn out. On the
flipside, most developers nowadays see the advantage of having more
than one hint in the name.
> I am stuck on either name and would your feedback based on my statements in
> this email. It might be worthwhile to throw this at the the clp.modules group.
Yes, please take the discussion there. We prefer if we have to tweak
namespaces as little as possible, and when a discussion somewhere else
has found a consensus, we are more than happy to accept it.
Thanks,
--
andreas
