# from A. Pagaltzis
# on Thursday 17 May 2007 02:17 pm:
>* Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-16 23:15]:
>> IMO, App:: is too much of a grab-bag to be any sort of useful
>> separation or organization.
>
>So we agree to use bin:: instead, though we can’t enforce that,
>... we have to make up *another* one in order to have it “pristine”
Whatever. Of course we can't enforce it. No we wouldn't have to be
reactionary and come up with yet-another space. The problem with App::
is that it grew that way and there was never any recommended convention
for naming distributions of small utilities. So, the argument against
a recommended name for a place in which to put utilities is:
A. It has never been like that and we fear change.
B. History is right, there is no future.
C. Chaos will win anyway.
hooray for pessimism
Yet, the question "where should I put my frobnicator program on CPAN"
keeps getting asked. Obviously some people are taking the effort to
come up with a name instead of just using A123734, etc.
> users looking for apps have to look both in App:: *and* in bin::
Search engines are good at that. The only point of the hierarchy is to
provide some clash prevention. Without the ::, we would be separating
with _ anyway.
I'm actually having a difficult time getting you all to agree to
*recommend* that things which will be installed in a directory named
"bin/" should have a namespace named "bin::"? Wow.
--Eric
--
Introducing change is like pulling off a bandage: the pain is a memory
almost as soon as you feel it.
--Paul Graham
---------------------------------------------------
http://scratchcomputing.com
---------------------------------------------------
