On 11/6/04 10:52 PM, David Nicol wrote: > I don't see a problem with branding your modules as "JCS" especially if you > use your initials for other stuff -- have you incorporated JCS Consulting LLC > or stuff like that?
No, heh (although "JCS Controls" has jcs.com) On 11/5/04 7:29 PM, Smylers wrote: > John Siracusa writes: >> * A set of DateTime utility functions >> It's my intention to release the entire suite as a "branded" entity >> much like Mason, Maypole, or Bricolage, with a unique top-level >> namespace to be determined later. (Obviously JCS:: will not do.) > > That's a good idea. Functional names work best for something like > Image::Size or Math::Round -- something that solves a reasonably small > and well-defined problem, and which people are likely to search for. > But big 'Way of Life' suites probably spread best by word-of-mouth > outside Cpan, and having a distinctive and memorable name works well. With the addition of file deletion to the PAUSE interface, I'm less worried about picking a bad name, so I've started uploading. I've gone with the name "Rose", and have uploaded the following components: Rose::URI Rose::Object Rose::DateTime Rose::HTML::Objects Various versions of these are winding their way through the CPAN mirror family, but only the most recent ones are non-broken. (I've already used the handy delete feature in PAUSE to mark the bad files for removal.) You can see the most recent versions on search.cpan.org: http://search.cpan.org/~jsiracusa/ Having split it up into components, I was left to wonder how to version (or even just describe) the whole suite as a unit. I uploaded a Rose.pm module and gave it a version, but I'm not sure how useful that is. I really don't want to have to bump the Rose.pm version every time I update a component. I originally intended Rose.pm to trigger the installation of all the latest versions of the components. I listed the components as prerequisites in Rose.pm's Makefile.PL. Unfortunately, that doesn't quite work so I released Bundle::Rose to serve that purpose. I decided to leave the prerequisites in Rose.pm because it doesn't really hurt, but now I'm wondering if this module needs to exist at all. If not, how will I signify the overall version of the suite? Or is that even a useful thing to do? Actually, I'll probably keep Rose.pm around if only for the "development policy" section of the POD. So the real issue is the versioning stuff. Any advice on that? Finally, is it worthwhile to announce these components somewhere, even if they are just version 0.0N at this point? Like I said earlier, I think the Rose::HTML::Objects module is already useful, but I can't make any API stability promises until 1.0. So, to announce or not to announce? And if so, where? -John
