At 13:22 18.06.2002, Stas Bekman wrote: >[when suggesting things please give people some time to respond, >especially given the crazy traffic at this list lately. I just had a >chance to read this thread.]
Sorry. >I'm -1 on renaming. Here is why: I never talked about renaming. I talked about new modules. >- Not all modules fit into suggested categories, some modules belong to >several ones. Of course, but just like on "regular" CPAN you choose a category even if it might not be *exactly* the one you're looking for, it's possible to choose a namespace because it's what's most appropriate for a module. If there's really a problem, then a new namespace could be created, there's nothing wrong with that. >- We definitely don't want the hell to break loose by pushing the authors >to rename their modules. Think of all the documents which aren't under our >control which refer to these module names! Books and articles to start with. As I said, I didn't say we should rename existing modules. >- This is also doesn't help with the move to 2.0, because many modules >will work with both versions without changes, or with some internal >changes transparent to users. It doesn't force authors to rename their >modules. And with the Apache2/ dir trick, there is no reason for doing >that at all. The Apache2/ trick doesn't help *people* follow module namings. My proposal is mainly targeted at peoples' minds: we like organization, that's why we have namespaces in the first place! >It'd be great though to have guidelines for developing Apache:: modules >and their name conventions. There feel free to suggest a better categorization. Oops, didn't see this one :) Well, that was mostly my suggestion. It's just about the naming for new modules. >And I'm -1 on maintaining a separate catalog. Here is why: > >CPAN is already categorizing Apache:: modules. >http://www.cpan.org/modules/00modlist.long.html#ID15_WorldWideW (just >scroll down till you get to Apache::) >all we need is to add #Apache and the problem solved. We have already >tried to maintain apache-modlist.html, which just didn't work, the file >was neglected and many new modules aren't there. Whereas they are in the >CPAN listing. May be instead of potentially wasting efforts here, the >effort should go to help improve 00modlist.long.html, so both Apache and >other Perl categories will benefit from this. I'm quite sure that Andreas >and folks who bring you CPAN will be glad to get any help in this >direction. Andreas please correct me if I'm wrong. That's why I contacted [EMAIL PROTECTED] I feel too that this would belong in the Perl module listing (although that didn't appear clearly in my other e-mail), but my proposal to PAUSE was just there to allow module authors to do their classification. -- Per Einar Ellefsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
