On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 05:37:17PM +0100, Smylers wrote: > Jerome Quelin writes: > > > - audio::mpd::common? (even if i don't think that's the best) > > - audio::mpd::test? this one is already used by a module in audio::mpd, > > but that's not a problem (i plan to move audio::mpd::test somewhere in > > t/lib/, so namespace would be free) > > - audio::mpd::testdata? > > - audio::mpd::common::test? > > - data::audio::mpd? > > - data::audio::mpd::test? > > - test::audio::mpd? > > I'd go for the latter (well, with some capital letters!) cos people are > used to the idea that Test:: modules are used for testing rather than > being part of the 'main function' of your program. > > But none of those names sound bad -- they're all pretty self- > explanatory, so any of them would do.
If the module is for use purely during testing, and serves no other useful purpose, I'd make sure to include the word "Test" (capitalised) somewhere in its distribution name. The variations on "common" without "test" would imply it's some sort of shared useful code to use in production use. -- Paul "LeoNerd" Evans leon...@leonerd.org.uk ICQ# 4135350 | Registered Linux# 179460 http://www.leonerd.org.uk/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
