PJ Eby <pje <at> telecommunity.com> writes: > And not quite the former, either; the same arguments about not > splitting a distribution apply to modules as well. i.e., a single > module might consume exports from more than one group, so saying they > should correspond is too strong; I would say instead that export group > names are dotted names that should be *prefixed* with the name of a > package or module provided by the relevant distribution.
You're right - I was being a little sloppy, but that was my understanding (i.e. the emphasis on prefixes). > (Of course, it's also perfectly fine for one to use a domain name or > other similarly-unique prefix; the real point is just that top-level > names should be reserved for groups defined by the stdlib and/or PEPs, > and everybody else should be using unique prefixes that give some > indication where one would look for a spec.) Right, though it's probably enough to just use a module name which is "unique" to the distribution. Of course, nothing prevents two completely unrelated distributions having a top-level module "foo", but in that case any ambiguity in export names is probably the least of the worries of someone who installs two such conflicting distributions. Regards, Vinay Sajip _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
