On 5/23/07 12:53 PM, Jonathan Vanasco wrote: > On May 23, 2007, at 9:36 AM, John Siracusa wrote: >> Does anyone have any good ideas for a namespace for module that augment or >> extend RDBO, but that are not part of the "official" RDBO distribution? The >> first thing that springs to my mind is: >> >> Rose::DBx::* >> > At first I really liked that, but then I read... > >> That'd be for both modules that are related to Rose::DB and modules that are >> related to Rose::DB::Object. > > Which would make it a bit awkward, I think, in the case of a > Rose::DB derived file, and not an object file.
How so? > My main worry is that Rose::DBx looks similar to Rose::DB Well, DBI did the DBIx thing, and Mason did the MasonX thing. I like Rose::DBx:: more than RoseX::, but I could be persuaded. > Rose::Community > Rose::Externals > Rose::Contributed Those are all way too long :) > Rose::xDB might work too - it gets your original point across > without looking too much like the real rose namespace. Yeah, that's not bad either. Other opinions? -John ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Rose-db-object mailing list Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
