At 20:52 02.09.2002, Randy Kobes wrote: >On Mon, 2 Sep 2002, Per Einar Ellefsen wrote: > > > At 12:09 02.09.2002, Tatsuhiko Miyagawa wrote: > > >Here I've made a new mod_perl module which allows you to call > > >ap_construct_url() from mod_perl. > > > > > >http://bulknews.net/lib/archives/Apache-CanonicalName-0.01.tar.gz > > > > > >Any suggestions welcome, especially regarding to: > > > > > >* Is naming OK? > > > > If you're CPANizing it, could I invite you to adopt the naming conventions > > I presented here: > > > >http://users.skynet.be/pereinar/mod-perl/products/apache-modules.html#Module_Naming_Conventions > > > > for your module? Apache::Util::CanonicalName seems like it would fit > pretty > > well. > >One of the downsides of an Apache::Util::* name (and also some >others in the suggested namespace categorization) is that there's >already an Apache::Util in modperl-2. Although it's not a rule, >there's a typical expectation that module X::Y::Z has a >relationship of some sort to module X::Y.
And there is already a Apache::Util in 1.0. I don't believe there will be many misunderstandings, as they are all utility modules after all. It might even help, because then people will group all Util:: modules together with Apache::Util mentally. -- Per Einar Ellefsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
