On Sat, Feb 21, 2004 at 07:44:28AM -0800, Exide Arabellan wrote: > Im working on a module that utilizes POE::Component::Server::TCP. Being > the neat freak that i am, im inclined to name the module > POE::Component::Server::TCP::MUD, though it seems rather cumbersome. > I've seen other modules (such as IRC::Bot) that take the last module and > use it as the begining of theirs. However when doing a CPAN search, > having the full title is helpful for a first glance appraisal of how its > written. > > Is this something people just do however they see fit, or is there a > standard/movement to have it one way or the other?
POE::Component::IRC was published before general naming conventions were formed. The conventions remain malleable to this day, but there's a little method to the madness. If your module implements a specific kind of MUD, possibly with a lot of modules, I'd suggest naming it Net::MUD::Arabellan (or whatever the name of your MUD is). If it's a generic module for providing front-end TCP services to a back-end MUD engine, I'd suggest POE::Server::MUD. MUD servers tend to be TCP things by default, so specifying it in the package name seems redundant. > Disclaimer: I apologize if this has been covered, in the case that it > has please point me to the post. I tried to scan for it, but didn't come > up with anything. No problem. Don't let the heavy development discussion scare you off. If it starts to get unbearable, we can always start another list. -- Rocco Caputo - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://poe.perl.org/
