Matt, Thank you for taking your time and explain further. I now can gather a couple things.
1. Util is deemed strongly undesirable as a top level namespace. 2. People -do- contribute under Util, but never have registered their modules because Util is not sanctioned, and/or because they never want to. After perusing https://pause.perl.org/pause/query?ACTION=pause_namingmodules I realized that "Util" is basically just another "Local" if you look past the semantics. Therefore, I'd like to withdraw my requests to register my modules under "Util", (If there's a way to do it on PAUSE, please let me know, I will do it there.) Also, I suppose I can just leave them the way they are, as I would with any modules under Local, unless of course, there's another reason I shouldn't even do that. I'm new to contributing to CPAN and can't help making a few mistakes (and learning from them) along the way. I have no intention, interest, nor time to not "behave reasonably". I was simply asking about something without realizing it was taboo. Lesson learned. :) I respect the collective wisdom on what's appropriate and what isn't. And I appreciate the effort you are making to keep things sane. It must be like herding cats. :) -Kan On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 4:37 AM, Matt S Trout <m...@shadowcat.co.uk> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 06:10:07PM -0800, Kan Liu wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Matt S Trout <m...@shadowcat.co.uk> wrote: >> > All of these modules seem like they could have sensible names. >> > >> >> My sincere apologies that my naming scheme assaulted your sensibility. >> I've tried to correct them after Brian pointed out the problem. In my >> defense, I did take time to think and rethink about their names before >> re-packing them up and uploading them. I guess they still don't quite >> cut the mustard :) >> >> > If you want to dump them into a top level namespace, might I suggest >> > KAN:: please? Util:: is meaningless and I really don't want people to >> > see that as a precedent. >> >> I understand your frustration about the Util namespace "pollution." >> But there must have existed a rationale for allowing it into existence >> in the first place. And if it's a deadly sin to upload to Util, >> perhaps there could be some sort of preventive measure on PAUSE at the >> time the modules are uploaded. (Not that I don't appreciate your >> concerns and input here.) > > CPAN has no control on uploading it, and it was never "allowed into > existence". > > Util:: is -not- a sanctioned top level namespace and we don't want it to be. > > There is no central control of CPAN - all we can do is ask people to behave > reasonably. > > This is me, asking you to behave reasonably. > >> In my previous exchange with Brian, I communicated my interpretation >> on "Util" as a sort of a community garden for odd/small modules that >> don't quite desserve a top level namespace their own. 'KAN' has just a >> bit too much ego/hubris for my taste :) > > Util:: is far more egotistical than KAN:: - KAN:: is "i'm not sure what the > best name for this is so I'm going to use my CPAN id to make a unique > proposed name" - Util:: is "I'm going to pollute a different global namespace > on CPAN rather than think about which one is right". > >> > >> > Please, *please* stop uploading into Util:: and let's talk about *good* >> > names for your code. I really want it on CPAN, but the current names are >> > really not a good idea. >> > >> >> I've definitely received the message, and it's loud and clear. I >> promise that no more modules (from me) will be uploaded to Util from >> now on. > > Please also delete and rename the existing ones. > > The more modules in Util:: the more likely it is that somebody in future > will make the same mistake of thinking that it's somehow a "sanctioned" > namespace. > >> I thought I had remedied my previous mistakes according to Brian's >> pointers (very informative and constructive), and would like them to >> stay the way they are now if it's not too big of a deal. > > I would, honestly, automatically ignore any module starting Util:: on a > CPAN search since if the author doesn't care enough to pick a real name > I don't trust them to care enough to have written useful code. > > So I'd suggest that both for our piece of mind, and for a better, happier > life for your contributions, you rename your existing modules. > >> Of course, if the 2nd level namespace and/or the module names >> themselves still suck badly, I'm willing to hear suggestions. > > Once you've deleted the Util:: versions, please feel free to ask this list > or me directly for naming suggestions with a description of the modules' > purposes. Your current descriptions mostly just seem to be slight expansions > of the names you've already chosen which makes it hard to give you > useful suggestions. > > -- > Matt S Trout - Shadowcat Systems - Perl consulting with a commit bit and a > clue > > http://shadowcat.co.uk/blog/matt-s-trout/ http://twitter.com/shadowcat_mst/ > > Email me now on mst (at) shadowcat.co.uk and let's chat about how our Catalyst > commercial support, training and consultancy packages could help your team. >
