Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules
At 5:36 AM + 5/26/07, Ron Savage wrote: >Darren Duncan wrote: > >> documentation (mainly the SeeAlso.pod) of what I have in mind, so > >This doc refers to both Darwen and Darwin. I suspect one of those is a typo. How right you are! Darwen is the correct spelling, and I fixed the typo, to be committed shortly. Thank you. -- Darren Duncan - 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
Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules
At 9:36 AM -0400 5/23/07, 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::* > >That'd be for both modules that are related to Rose::DB and modules that are >related to Rose::DB::Object. > >Anyone have any better ideas? I have a suggestion that I would think superior, presented in generic terms. Rather than using FooX to indicate anything not part of the core distribution, the X suffix should be used instead for Foo related things that are not officially vetted by the Foo core developers. See, it is likely that the core developers of Foo have ideas in mind about what namespaces that a framework of modules built around Foo would have, and so if third parties have ideas for some extension that the Foo developers like and think would integrate into their framework well, they could grant them appropriate non-X namespaces for the extensions. So then the X namespace is mainly for third parties that are doing things unilaterally without consulting with the Foo developers. Take for example the DBI framework ... modules can get a DBI::* or DBD::* name if they are basically sanctioned as belonging there, and otherwise go in DBIx or something else. Though mind you DBI is somewhat a different case because it is very old and there are legacy issues to deal with. But by contrast things like Rose and many other projects don't have this kind of legacy and can more freely use non-X spaces. What I propose is the tactic that I'm using for my QDRDBMS framework. The core distro is kept small to the essentials, and I already have in mind a variety of other framework parts which are intentionally distributed separately. So people who come to me and want to make something which would fit into my conceived name hierarchy and/or convince me of their idea can get a QDRDBMS::* name endorsed by me, and otherwise I hope people will use QDRDBMSx::* or some such. Towards this end, I have actually sketched out in the QDRDBMS documentation (mainly the SeeAlso.pod) of what I have in mind, so people can be working more from a common starting place when figuring out names. Ideally, there wouldn't be too many x modules as hopefully there would be enough communication or forethought that things can be more integrated to good places. Fyi, see eg http://utsl.gen.nz/gitweb/?p=QDRDBMS;a=tree for that which I speak of. -- Darren Duncan - 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
Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules
On Wed, 23 May 2007, John Siracusa wrote: > For example, Mike Schilli has a module that splits a single big > Manager call into a series of smaller ones internally (in order to get > around some memory issues in some DBD::* modules). I'd call that one: > > Rose::DBx::Object::InternalPager Sounds good to me. Please find the tarball attached. If nobody screams, I'm gonna push it to CPAN in the next couple of days. -- Mike Mike Schilli [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The ::Object part is there to indicate that it's an extension of > Rose::DB::Object, not Rose::DB. > > Anyone have any better ideas? > > -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 > Rose-DBx-Object-InternalPager-0.01.tar.gz Description: Rose-DBx-Object-InternalPager-0.01.tar.gz - 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
Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules
John Siracusa wrote on 5/23/07 1:07 PM: > On 5/23/07 2:01 PM, mla wrote: >> Where would an extension of Rose::Object go? I wouldn't expect >> it under Rose::DBx, right? I'd expect something like Rose::ObjectX >> in that case (following the DBx convention), no? > > Yeah, something like that. Rose::HTMLx:: has also already been discussed as > a possibility for Rose::HTML:: extension. > not only discussed but started: http://search.cpan.org/~karman/Rose-HTMLx-Form-Field-Autocomplete-0.02/ ;) -- Peter Karman . http://peknet.com/ . [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 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
Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules
On 5/23/07 2:01 PM, mla wrote: > Where would an extension of Rose::Object go? I wouldn't expect > it under Rose::DBx, right? I'd expect something like Rose::ObjectX > in that case (following the DBx convention), no? Yeah, something like that. Rose::HTMLx:: has also already been discussed as a possibility for Rose::HTML:: extension. -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
Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules
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::* > > That'd be for both modules that are related to Rose::DB and modules that are > related to Rose::DB::Object. > > For example, Mike Schilli has a module that splits a single big Manager call > into a series of smaller ones internally (in order to get around some memory > issues in some DBD::* modules). I'd call that one: > > Rose::DBx::Object::InternalPager > > The ::Object part is there to indicate that it's an extension of > Rose::DB::Object, not Rose::DB. > > Anyone have any better ideas? I like DBx and xDB. Where would an extension of Rose::Object go? I wouldn't expect it under Rose::DBx, right? I'd expect something like Rose::ObjectX in that case (following the DBx convention), no? Maurice - 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
Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules
On May 23, 2007, at 10:48 AM, John Siracusa wrote: > 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 i think Rose::DBx is fine, and Rose::DBx::TotallyRad and Rose::DBx::Object::TotallyRad seem clear enough what's what to me. - 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
Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules
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
Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules
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. My main worry is that Rose::DBx looks similar to Rose::DB What about something that builds off the community RoseX Rose::X Rose::Community Rose::Externals Rose::Contributed Rose::xDB might work too - it gets your original point across without looking too much like the real rose namespace. - 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
[RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules
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::* That'd be for both modules that are related to Rose::DB and modules that are related to Rose::DB::Object. For example, Mike Schilli has a module that splits a single big Manager call into a series of smaller ones internally (in order to get around some memory issues in some DBD::* modules). I'd call that one: Rose::DBx::Object::InternalPager The ::Object part is there to indicate that it's an extension of Rose::DB::Object, not Rose::DB. Anyone have any better ideas? -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
