Re: [RFC] web-messaging application for mod_perl
Adi Fairbank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On, or in the near vicinity of Tue, 15 Jul 2003 01:47:13 -0500 Ok, I'm sold. Now I get the reason for not using such a generic name. In fact, I really like your suggestion Apache::App::Mercury. If you don't mind, I'll use that name! Do you mind? Glad I could help. As far as I'm concerned, you are free to use the name. I don't have any particular claim to it myself. -- James Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED], 979-862-3725 Texas AM CIS Operating Systems Group, Unix
Re: [RFC] web-messaging application for mod_perl
Adi Fairbank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On, or in the near vicinity of Mon, 14 Jul 2003 18:49:58 +0300 Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED] has thus written: Probably the best bet is to give it some cool unique name, like Apache::AdiChat and then you are all set, since you are not going to take over any future framework/namespaces... What's wrong with WebMessaging ? Do you foresee that interfering with some future software in the Apache:: namespace, or is it just too generic? I thought it was a good name since it accurately describes what it is: not webmail, not instant messaging, but web messaging. (basically, it's like those message boxes you get on a stock trading website when you login to your account) Here are the possibilities: 1 Apache::WebMessaging 2 Apache::App::WebMessaging 3 Apache::SomeOtherUniqueName (e.g. ServerMessaging, or UserMessaging, or SystemMessaging) I personally prefer 1 or 2, so if there are no serious objections, I'll pick one of those. Let me know which you like the best. As an aside, RFC 1178 has some ideas on host naming that might be useful here: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1178.txt?number=1178 . We're not talking about naming hosts, but the principles are similar. (I do make a suggestion on names in the penultimate paragraph.) First, there are several things WebMessaging could mean: a Web e-mail client such as TWIG (in PHP) or SquirrelMail (I think in Perl) or a web interface for sending SMS messages to cell phones. There are protocols that this can be done with: SOAP, XML-RPC, Jabber, Sun RPC, SMTP, etc. Some are more useful in certain situations than others. For customer to customer messaging, there are several different types: instant messaging, usually mediated via Java clients but sometimes through a reloaded web page (at least in olden times [4 years ago]), store and forward (e.g., WebCT internal e-mail system whereby customers can send messages to other customers without leaving the application). There are probably others I haven't run into yet or that I've forgotten about. From what I can see from your description and a brief look at some of the code, you are doing a small portion of what web messaging can mean: customer to customer, store and forward messaging. Because you don't cover all the possibilities (and it would be unreasonable to expect anyone to do so), I would discourage using such a generic name. There are other applications on CPAN that use somewhat fanciful names that have a connection to the application: o I've used Uttu (a Sumerian goddess of weaving) for an application framework framework and Gestinanna (... of record keeping, iirc) for a system/customer account management application. (Neither of these are `popular' or finished enough to warrant any significant attention -- I use them only as examples.) o Dave Rolsky's used Alzabo (``The red orbs of the alzabo were something more, neither the intelligence of humankind nor the innocence of the brutes. So a fiend might look, I thought, when it had at last struggled up from the pit of some dark star.'' -- Gene Wolfe _The Sword of the Lictor__) for an RDBMS schema management and data access system. o Jonathan Swartz chose Mason for a component-based templating system. There's OpenInteract, Bricolage, Tangram, AxKit, etc., all of which have names only loosely tied to what they are doing. Having unique names like these helps in several ways. First, they don't preclude others from entering the same `market,' which can be seen as part of the TMTOWTDI tradition in Perl. Second, they serve to brand the application. If you give a talk about Web Messaging, what do people expect? We're back to the survey above. On the other hand, a talk about a particular name, such as Apache::App::Mercury, might let people know more quickly what you are wanting to discuss. Finally, you might want to change the version from 0.80pre1 to 0.80_01 -- CPAN might get confused by the first format. -- James Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED], 979-862-3725 Texas AM CIS Operating Systems Group, Unix
Re: [RFC] web-messaging application for mod_perl
Adi Fairbank wrote: On, or in the near vicinity of Mon, 14 Jul 2003 18:49:58 +0300 Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED] has thus written: Probably the best bet is to give it some cool unique name, like Apache::AdiChat and then you are all set, since you are not going to take over [...] What's wrong with WebMessaging ? Do you foresee that interfering with some future software in the Apache:: namespace, or is it just too generic? I thought it was a good name since it accurately describes what it is: not webmail, not instant messaging, but web messaging. (basically, it's like those message boxes you get on a stock trading website when you login to your account) James has gone into a detailed reply why this could be a bad idea. I'd just add that it's very hard to choose a good name for a module. And it seems that unique k001 names never have such problems. Perhaps you can have a unique name for your application and in the future you will extract a framework from it, making your app use it and allowing other apps to do the same. So with time you will see whether Apache::WebMessaging is a good name and whether it fits well into the scope of what it's supposed to do. __ Stas BekmanJAm_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
Re: [RFC] web-messaging application for mod_perl
hi ( 03.07.14 20:14 -0700 ) Adi Fairbank: ( I wouldn't want to have any piece of software named after me... just my personal style. Software lives for too long, especially open source. It would still be called that long after I'm dead. ) don't be too sure. no one may call it anything at all in about 6 months ... Here are the possibilities: what about Apache::Messaging::Web to leave room for other messaging modules to share this namespace [::Pager or ::Fax ...] -- \js
Re: [RFC] web-messaging application for mod_perl
Adi Fairbank wrote: On, or in the near vicinity of Tue, 1 Jul 2003 11:23:00 +0200 Enrico Sorcinelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] has thus spoken: On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 12:57:00 -0700 Adi Fairbank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Apache::WebMessaging I am about ready to release an intraserver web-messaging application for mod_perl. A brief description of the app follows; I'd like to hear some comments from the mod_perl/Perl/P5EE community on: You could look about Apache::* modules naming conventions: http://perl.apache.org/products/apache-modules.html#Module_Naming_Conventions Apache::App::WebMessaging namespace could be a right place :-) According to the asterisk note below Apache::App:: However, if you are planning a substantial framework with many inter-related modules, you should probably go with a top-level namespace outside of Apache::. This app already has 7-8 inter-related modules, though I would not call it a substantial framework. In fact it requires you to already have your own application framework setup in order to use it. It's basically a plug-in application for your existing mod_perl framework. I could rename it to just WebMessaging:: but it is specifically designed for mod_perl, which is why I think it should go in Apache::. Also, I noticed there are currently no Apache::App:: modules. Should this be the first?? Probably the best bet is to give it some cool unique name, like Apache::AdiChat and then you are all set, since you are not going to take over any future framework/namespaces... __ Stas BekmanJAm_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
Re: [RFC] web-messaging application for mod_perl
On, or in the near vicinity of Mon, 14 Jul 2003 18:49:58 +0300 Stas Bekman [EMAIL PROTECTED] has thus written: Probably the best bet is to give it some cool unique name, like Apache::AdiChat and then you are all set, since you are not going to take over any future framework/namespaces... Well, I don't like that name, but I do get what you mean. ( I wouldn't want to have any piece of software named after me... just my personal style. Software lives for too long, especially open source. It would still be called that long after I'm dead. ) What's wrong with WebMessaging ? Do you foresee that interfering with some future software in the Apache:: namespace, or is it just too generic? I thought it was a good name since it accurately describes what it is: not webmail, not instant messaging, but web messaging. (basically, it's like those message boxes you get on a stock trading website when you login to your account) Here are the possibilities: 1 Apache::WebMessaging 2 Apache::App::WebMessaging 3 Apache::SomeOtherUniqueName (e.g. ServerMessaging, or UserMessaging, or SystemMessaging) I personally prefer 1 or 2, so if there are no serious objections, I'll pick one of those. Let me know which you like the best. -Adi
Re: [RFC] web-messaging application for mod_perl
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 12:57:00 -0700 Adi Fairbank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Apache::WebMessaging I am about ready to release an intraserver web-messaging application for mod_perl. A brief description of the app follows; I'd like to hear some comments from the mod_perl/Perl/P5EE community on: You could look about Apache::* modules naming conventions: http://perl.apache.org/products/apache-modules.html#Module_Naming_Conventions Apache::App::WebMessaging namespace could be a right place :-) by - Enrico
Re: [RFC] web-messaging application for mod_perl
On, or in the near vicinity of Tue, 1 Jul 2003 11:23:00 +0200 Enrico Sorcinelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] has thus spoken: On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 12:57:00 -0700 Adi Fairbank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Apache::WebMessaging I am about ready to release an intraserver web-messaging application for mod_perl. A brief description of the app follows; I'd like to hear some comments from the mod_perl/Perl/P5EE community on: You could look about Apache::* modules naming conventions: http://perl.apache.org/products/apache-modules.html#Module_Naming_Conventions Apache::App::WebMessaging namespace could be a right place :-) According to the asterisk note below Apache::App:: However, if you are planning a substantial framework with many inter-related modules, you should probably go with a top-level namespace outside of Apache::. This app already has 7-8 inter-related modules, though I would not call it a substantial framework. In fact it requires you to already have your own application framework setup in order to use it. It's basically a plug-in application for your existing mod_perl framework. I could rename it to just WebMessaging:: but it is specifically designed for mod_perl, which is why I think it should go in Apache::. Also, I noticed there are currently no Apache::App:: modules. Should this be the first?? -Adi
