Re: [RFC] Gtk2::SizeRecall - Persistently store and restore widgetsizes

["A. Pagaltzis" <pagaltzis gmx de>]

* Emmanuele Bassi <bassi-e libero it> [2004-05-19 11:56]:
> Even if we could answer "Yes, it indeed does bother us", the
> following question would be: "How in the world could we enforce
> any policy about any namespace we decide to use?" Thought
> police or orbital mind control lasers aside, I mean. :-)

What, you don't have those? :-)

And yeah, that's precisely the question. That was why I was
arguing that it's better to use a crappier name that people are
likely to use without specifically being told to, rather than a
well thought-out namespace that they're more likely to ignore.

> I mean: if someone wrote a module for a Perl widget, and that
> someone decided to put it on CPAN under the Gtk2 namespace,
> what could we possibly do? Should we slap him hard on the nose
> with a rolled newspaper, and tell him "Bad Perl monkey, bad
> Perl monkey"?

Send him the videoclip. Bad Programmer!! No cookie!!

;-)

> Each namespace we choose [..] has in it the seed of the
> problem.

Yes. :-/ See above. We are actually in agreement.

> I think that a Gtk2::[Foo] should be a "official" Gtk2-Perl
> contrib module, with a policy [...], some prerequisites [...]
> and some goodies [...]. We simply give developers who care an
> option to make things the clean way; if there are some
> developers who do not give a flying fsck about that policy,
> well: entropy will increase...  As it always does. :-)

Yeah. I guess that's the only sensible course after all. And if
we go that way we can as well go whole hog and pick a well
thought-out namespace.

> All of this is MHO, obviously.

But sensible and very much what I was thinking as well.

-- 
Regards,
Aristotle
 
"If you can't laugh at yourself, you don't take life seriously enough."