On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:57:31 +0100, Schuett Thomas EXT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I want to contribute a perl script for the versioning system
> >> ClearCase, so I want to suggest the new script category
> >> "VersionControl : ClearCase (tm)"
>
> > I think that your proposal is very sensible.
>
> Hmm, so what does this mean? Yes or no, and why?
I am here to give advice, not to say yes or no.
> >> As ClearCase is a trademark, I wonder, if it is sufficient
> >> to add an (tm) behind it?
>
> > I don't believe that the (tm) is necessary or appropriate.
>
> Even better, that is something I actually like to hear :-)
Go ahead and upload your script as "VersionControl:ClearCase",
then, and I will create a category.
> BTW: I realized, that if someone wants to write a perl prog, and
> needs some isolatable functionality, he of course would have a
> look at CPAN. But if someone, say, uses ClearCase, why at all he
> should look into the CPAN scripts area?
I do not follow your logic. He should look into the CPAN scripts
area because a solution might be found there.
> So I wonder if the scripts
> area is doomed to "not work" by fundamental reasons. Are there any
> usage statistics confirming or rejecting this theorie?
No. Due to the nature of CPAN, we have no reliable download
statistics and we never will.
- Kurt
