Tim Bunce wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2002 at 10:43:37PM +0800, Stas Bekman wrote: > >>Rememeber that this is an extensible framework and not a package with >>general purpose modules, so it won't fit into any POD::, HTML::, etc >>namespaces. Should we create a new hierarchy for apps? App::, Bin::? >> >>Thanks for your ideas! If you don't have any I'm quite happy with >>keeping the DocSet name. > > > The general convention is that "frameworks" are _encouraged_ to have a > catchy non-generic "brand name" for the top-level name.
I haven't thought of this idea. I was trying to match the name to the functionality :) > DocSet seems fine to me, assuming it doesn't clash with some other > concept "out there" that someone may want perl modules for later. > A quick google search turned up these: > >http://happydoc.sourceforge.net/HappyDoc-r2_0_1/happydoclib/happydocset_DocSet.py.html > http://cic.cstb.fr/ilc/DOCSET/docset.htm That's true. Again I haven't thought of the outside world, was looking at CPAN only. Thanks for the comments. > but I'd say you can grab the DocSet name now. Cool, so if I don't come up with some cool brand name, be it DocSet. Thanks Tim! __________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
