>>>>> On Sat, 20 Apr 2002 15:16:13 -0400, "Lincoln A. Baxter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >said:
> Hi all, > I would like to call your attention for the following thread on > comp.lang.perl.modules: "New module which provides access to HP > Openview opcmsg API". > This is a discussion I started concerning top level API name space > issues surrounding the addition of a new or sub namespace for an > Openview extension module. The problem is that this is nowhere near > large enough (currently at least) to justify a new toplevel namespace, > but there appears to be no clear namespace into which it should be > placed. I am interested in discussion... before I a "set my new > module name in concrete", as I want general acceptance of whatever > name I finally settle on. > At first I rejected Net:: because it appeared to be vendor > independant, then someone pointed out AIM and several other modules > there. So maybe, Net::Openview:: makes the most sense. > Still listening... wanting to finalize... Net:: is worn out and very crowded, so adding a namespace below Net:: is only marginally better than a new toplevel namespace. I'd say Openview sounds good. -- andreas
