On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 09:12:47PM -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: On 10/19/05, Nate Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > My concern is that we're solving problems that don't really exist in
: > real-world Perl usage. Are there really two competing authors of DBI?
: > Or, for any product, do two people really try to market "SuperWidget"?
: > No, one person just changes to "SuperGadget". And with URI's, one person
: > gets "amazon.com". Sorry, name taken.
: >
: > I think we're actually *encouraging* problems by allowing long, clashing
: > names. Pretty soon all DBI modules will have to start with
: >
: >     use DBI:TIMB;
: >
: > Because "JEFFSTER" decided to upload his DBI (Derivative Binary Index)
: > module.
: >
: > I think it will have the opposite effect of what we're trying to avoid.
: I'm of two minds about this, in large part because I have two
: experiences with the current CPAN.
: My first CPAN module was taking over PDF::Template, originally written
: by DFERRANCE. Now, it's maintained by RKINYON, soon to be maintained
: by RKINYON and STEVAN due to amazing contributions by AUTRIJUS (or
: whatever those characters are supposed to be).
: Now, how are authorship-changes going to be handled, particularly in
: the face of having two PDF::Templates out there already? Everyone is
: disambiguating their modules with PDF::Template-DFERRANCE vs.
: PDF::Template-JRANDOM. Now, they cannot upgrade to my latest feature
: because that requires changing every place they had hard-coded
: DFERRANCE. Or, will the package system map PDF::Template-DFERRANCE to
: PDF::Template-RKINYON?

I suspect you just use PDF::Template and have some other way of
instructing the library system about your general policy preferences,
so that anywhere that uses PDF::Template on your project uses the
same one by default.

: The second experience is one I'm going through right now. I was adding
: a feature to Tree:Simple a few weeks back and realized that it needed
: to be gutted to do what I needed it to do. With the encouragement of
: the author, I rewrote it completely. My development name for the
: distro is "Forest", but I have Tree and Tree::Binary as the packages.
: (Yeah, it's a math joke.)
: Except, there's two problems with that - Tree is a TLN (top-level
: namespace) with a lot of unrelated distros beneath it. And, Tree is
: owned by someone else, but that person hasn't updated Tree in 6 years.
: And, Tree::Binary is owned by the same guy who owns Tree::Simple.
: How is that going to work in P6? (For the record, I still haven't
: figured out what I'm going to do yet. Check Perlmonks for the SOPW in
: a few minutes.)

We probably need some meta-information somewhere about which names claim
to offer the same interface, and which are just accidental collisions.
That part isn't terribly well defined yet.


Reply via email to