* Brad Lhotsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-11-13 17:58]: > Anyone see this as useful?
Sure is. > Is 'Linux::ForkControl' a decent name for this module? I don't think so. We already have a TLNS for process related stuff - "Proc::". Okay, so this is Linux specific. That belongs in the name too. And finally there's its job, ForkControl. That makes it Proc::Linux::ForkControl or Proc::ForkControl::Linux. I would strongly favour the latter, so we can also have Proc::ForkControl::Solaris and Proc::ForkControl::BSD etc etc. In fact, depending on how generic your API is and how much of the Linux specifica you want to exploit, it might be worth thinking about calling your module and distributions just Proc::ForkControl, and then putting the current implementation in a backend module called Proc::ForkControl::Linux. The frontend could then be written to automagically determine which backend to use and also offer a way for the user to request a specific one. -- Regards, Aristotle "If you can't laugh at yourself, you don't take life seriously enough."
