* Graciliano M. P. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-29 19:55]:
> I'm working on a module that make a bridge between the
> R-project "intepreter" and Perl.
The R Project is about statistics; a search on CPAN reveals that
there's a toplevel namespace called "Statistics". That's
basically your module nam
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 07:04:52PM +, Adrian Howard wrote:
>
> On Thursday, January 29, 2004, at 04:08 am, Lincoln A. Baxter wrote:
>
> >Phew... Only one comment: KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)
> [snip]
> >No fancy versioning emnumeration scheme can replace this testing, and
> >what we have n
On Thursday, January 29, 2004, at 04:08 am, Lincoln A. Baxter wrote:
Phew... Only one comment: KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)
[snip]
No fancy versioning emnumeration scheme can replace this testing, and
what we have now works "well enough" (I think). Most module authors I
think are pretty good abo
Oops, forgot to copy the group.
Also, Math != Statistics
I'd prefer to see this in Statistics::R::*
(My GF is a Stat major and has made me QUITE aware that statisticians
are not necessarily matheticians, and vice versa)
- Forwarded message from Brad Lhotsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From:
Graciliano M. P. wrote:
I'm working on a module that make a bridge between the R-project
"intepreter" and Perl. Actually I need to have this done today, soo, I will
ask for a fast reply. Thanks in advance.
Soo, I need some adivices for the name of the module. Here are some names,
just vote in one o
On Thursday 29 January 2004 19:50, Graciliano M. P. wrote:
> I'm working on a module that make a bridge between the R-project
> "intepreter" and Perl. Actually I need to have this done today, soo, I will
> ask for a fast reply. Thanks in advance.
It would help if we knew what the R-Project was,
F
I'm working on a module that make a bridge between the R-project
"intepreter" and Perl. Actually I need to have this done today, soo, I will
ask for a fast reply. Thanks in advance.
Soo, I need some adivices for the name of the module. Here are some names,
just vote in one or send suggestions(plea
* Mark Overmeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-29 02:12]:
> But of course, he feels the need to insult other people's work
> to promote his own. It's his way of gaining importance.
I don't think he's insulting in order to promote so much as
simply being vocal about his dissatisfaction with existing
Title: RE: New module Mail::SendEasy
> > Unless I read the file incorrectly MIME::Lite is indeed
> > in the module list, at least I see it there.
> > Afaik its been in the wild since at least 98, if not
> > earlier. (I dont know the full history, I am only
> > the module main
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 12:23:51PM -, Orton, Yves wrote:
>> I think MIME::Lite isn't in the Module List so the name
>> wasn't "peer-reviewed".
>>
>> The peer-review process offered by [EMAIL PROTECTED] certainly isn't
>> perfect, but I do believe it's very valuable.
>
>
Yes it's confusing, I'm having trouble following bits of it, I'm sure anyone
else who's actually bothering is too. Hopefully all the confusion will be
gone at the end and only clarity will remain, that or utter confusion - it
could end up either way really.
To see why the current situation is most
Title: RE: New module Mail::SendEasy
> I think MIME::Lite isn't in the Module List so the name
> wasn't "peer-reviewed".
>
> The peer-review process offered by [EMAIL PROTECTED] certainly isn't
> perfect, but I do believe it's very valuable.
Unless I read the file incorrectly MIME::Lite is
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 09:10:19AM +, Martyn J. Pearce wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 12:45:28AM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> > But I also find MIME::Lite to be a horrible name. It certainly
> > doesn't present the module as a choice when you go through the
> > obvious keywords looking for mo
Hi Nadim,
The difference is that Module::Build forces the Foo::Bar's author to work
out what current versions of Some::Module and Other::Module are suitable and
to try to predict what future version will still be compatible. This is time
consuming and error prone (predicting the future isn't easy)
On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 12:45:28AM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> But I also find MIME::Lite to be a horrible name. It certainly
> doesn't present the module as a choice when you go through the
> obvious keywords looking for modules for sending mail.
>
> Of course, at this point, "MIME::Lite" is so
* Graciliano M. P. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-01-27 06:16]:
> First, I didn't know MIME::Lite until Orton send me an e-mail
> in this list.
Of all the things that bother me in this discussion, this one
bothers me the most.
The reason for this, I think, is two-fold.
Obviously Gracilliano's researc
16 matches
Mail list logo
