> Date: 08 Nov 2000 11:40:26 +0100
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas J. Koenig)
>
> Sorry for the oversight, you're registered now.
No problem, thanks for the prompt attention this time around!
> >> What I'm planning to contribute: module Net::Z3950::Services
> >> (and other Net::Z3950::* modules in the future)
> --> Description in module list format (DSLI entry): adcO
> --> 44 character description: OO interface to the Yaz Z39.50 toolkit
> >> Public discussion of contribution: there has been none; however, I
> >> have kept exhaustive logs of email exchanges between me and my
> >> collaborators during the design and development process -- let me know
> >> if you'd like to see them (542152 bytes)
>
> Is this the same thing as Heikki Levanto (CC'd) describes in
>
> http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/modules/2000-08/msg00132.html
> ?
Yes, it's pretty much the same thing; certainly the work I want to
contribute to CPAN has been done in collaboration with Heikki's
employers Index Data ApS (as you can see from the Cc: to Heiki's
colleague Sebastian) -- in fact, the module I want to contribute is
advertised on the front page of www.indexdata.dk!
> If not, it would be a good idea if the united Yaz hackers could come
> up with namespace suggestions. We, the module list maintainers,
> would then register these namespaces so that overlap and confusion
> is avoided and all that.
>
> How does that sound?
I think that the simplest general approach would be to give the whole
of Net::Z3950 to Index Data and me jointly and severally, and we'll
figure out between us how best to slice up the area beneath that.
That's unless CPAN-meisters wish to keep a tighter rein on the whole
of the namespace.
Does PAUSE make it possible for multiple contributors to put modules
into the same area? If not, then probably the easiest way to do this,
is just to give me Net::Z3950, and let me handle the uploads for my
Index Data collaborators.
Is it legitimate CPAN behaviour to have a module distribution called
(just) Net::Z3950 and another called Net::Z3950::SimpleServer, or
should we applu the rule that if lower nodes are used, then the upper
nodes should not be?
Thanks for your help,
Mike Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.staff.tecc.co.uk/mike/
