On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 12:23:51PM -0000, Orton, Yves wrote: > > I think MIME::Lite isn't in the Module List so the name > > wasn't "peer-reviewed". > > > > The peer-review process offered by [EMAIL PROTECTED] certainly isn't > > perfect, but I do believe it's very valuable. > > Unless I read the file incorrectly MIME::Lite is indeed in the module list, at > least I see it there. > Afaik its been in the wild since at least 98, if not earlier. (I dont know the > full history, I am only > the module maintainer)
Ah, thanks. I'd missed it. (And I wish search.cpan.org made it easier to tell if a module is registered). > Also, I believe that MIME::Lite quite likely predates the peer review process, it > certainly predates > these newfangled root level names like Mail:: and such. There's always been a review process for the Module List. But it's always hard to look several years into the future when trying to see how namespaces might evolve. Tim. > I would argue that MIME isnt actually that bad a name. MIME is the protocol for > the contents of a mail. > Not related to how mails are recieved, stored, searched, or transmitted. The > fact that MIME::Lite knows > how to talk to modules that know how to transmit is seperate from the fact that > it intends to manage > MIME content mails. Since a mail need not be MIME there is no reason for it to be > called Mail:: or > whatever. > > Anyway, if someone wants to argue that I should put MIME::Lite into a different > namespace ill consider > it. It wouldnt be too difficult to also have it called Mail::MIME::Lite or > whatever. > > yves >
