On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 21:27:57 -0400, Ross McFarland wrote:
On Tue, 2004-05-18 at 20:57, A. Pagaltzis wrote:* Emmanuele Bassi <bassi-e libero it> [2004-05-19 02:48]:I still think that creating a new TLNS is a Bad Idea(tm)...I agree, and in ideal world, it wouldn't even be an issue. Alas, it's no ideal world, and people upload stuff to CPAN before thinking about all of the issues. Mostly, they're just hacking on some code in their free time for fun and they just want to put it out there without thinking about formalities. You know, like who cares about that stuff -- right? I guess the question is: Does it bother us if people will just ignore this subnamespace and put things in Gtk2:: ?we could put some nasty name space clobbering code in Gtk2 that went through perl's symbol tables periodically got rid of anything we didn't approve of. :) there's no perfect answer, i would have to say that either Gtk2::Perl or Gtk2Perl would work. either way enforcing it will be hard. we just need to make a decision and hope for the best, heh. on top of that, there's already a few things in the Gtk2 name-space that probably shouldn't be (and we put them there)
Well, if people upload something to CPAN on their own, we won't force
them to use particular namespace. I would, however, like to see
a "contrib" module for colleting various small goodies -- and that
should live in a special namespace.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb ucw cz>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature