Hi, On Monday 28 September 2009 18.37.17 Smylers wrote: > Jerome Quelin writes: > > - audio::mpd::common? (even if i don't think that's the best) > > - audio::mpd::test? this one is already used by a module in audio::mpd, > > but that's not a problem (i plan to move audio::mpd::test somewhere in > > t/lib/, so namespace would be free) > > - audio::mpd::testdata? > > - audio::mpd::common::test? > > - data::audio::mpd? > > - data::audio::mpd::test? > > - test::audio::mpd? > > I'd go for the latter (well, with some capital letters!) cos people are > used to the idea that Test:: modules are used for testing rather than > being part of the 'main function' of your program. > > But none of those names sound bad -- they're all pretty self- > explanatory, so any of them would do. > > Smylers
I'd desagree with Smylers. Test:: is for testing modules while your data is, well data, and very much special to Audio::Mpd. My vote would go to Audio::Mpd::Test::Data::+ whatever you want this would also allow you to keep your current test module where it is. I also believe that minimizing the need to upload the test data (even if it's not too much data) is a great idea. Now you could also delete the test data after the tests. Cheers, Nadim.
