Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules

2007-05-25 Thread Darren Duncan
At 5:36 AM + 5/26/07, Ron Savage wrote: >Darren Duncan wrote: > >> documentation (mainly the SeeAlso.pod) of what I have in mind, so > >This doc refers to both Darwen and Darwin. I suspect one of those is a typo. How right you are! Darwen is the correct spelling, and I fixed the typo, to be

Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules

2007-05-25 Thread Darren Duncan
At 9:36 AM -0400 5/23/07, John Siracusa wrote: >Does anyone have any good ideas for a namespace for module that augment or >extend RDBO, but that are not part of the "official" RDBO distribution? The >first thing that springs to my mind is: > > Rose::DBx::* > >That'd be for both modules that a

Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules

2007-05-24 Thread Mike Schilli
On Wed, 23 May 2007, John Siracusa wrote: > For example, Mike Schilli has a module that splits a single big > Manager call into a series of smaller ones internally (in order to get > around some memory issues in some DBD::* modules). I'd call that one: > > Rose::DBx::Object::InternalPager So

Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules

2007-05-23 Thread Peter Karman
John Siracusa wrote on 5/23/07 1:07 PM: > On 5/23/07 2:01 PM, mla wrote: >> Where would an extension of Rose::Object go? I wouldn't expect >> it under Rose::DBx, right? I'd expect something like Rose::ObjectX >> in that case (following the DBx convention), no? > > Yeah, something like that. Ros

Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules

2007-05-23 Thread John Siracusa
On 5/23/07 2:01 PM, mla wrote: > Where would an extension of Rose::Object go? I wouldn't expect > it under Rose::DBx, right? I'd expect something like Rose::ObjectX > in that case (following the DBx convention), no? Yeah, something like that. Rose::HTMLx:: has also already been discussed as a pos

Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules

2007-05-23 Thread mla
John Siracusa wrote: > Does anyone have any good ideas for a namespace for module that augment or > extend RDBO, but that are not part of the "official" RDBO distribution? The > first thing that springs to my mind is: > > Rose::DBx::* > > That'd be for both modules that are related to Rose::

Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules

2007-05-23 Thread Michael Reece
On May 23, 2007, at 10:48 AM, John Siracusa wrote: > On 5/23/07 12:53 PM, Jonathan Vanasco wrote: >> On May 23, 2007, at 9:36 AM, John Siracusa wrote: >>> Does anyone have any good ideas for a namespace for module that >>> augment or >>> extend RDBO, but that are not part of the "official" RDB

Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules

2007-05-23 Thread John Siracusa
On 5/23/07 12:53 PM, Jonathan Vanasco wrote: > On May 23, 2007, at 9:36 AM, John Siracusa wrote: >> Does anyone have any good ideas for a namespace for module that augment or >> extend RDBO, but that are not part of the "official" RDBO distribution? The >> first thing that springs to my mind is:

Re: [RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules

2007-05-23 Thread Jonathan Vanasco
On May 23, 2007, at 9:36 AM, John Siracusa wrote: > Does anyone have any good ideas for a namespace for module that > augment or > extend RDBO, but that are not part of the "official" RDBO > distribution? The > first thing that springs to my mind is: > > Rose::DBx::* At first I really l

[RDBO] Namespace for 3rd-party RDBO modules

2007-05-23 Thread John Siracusa
Does anyone have any good ideas for a namespace for module that augment or extend RDBO, but that are not part of the "official" RDBO distribution? The first thing that springs to my mind is: Rose::DBx::* That'd be for both modules that are related to Rose::DB and modules that are related to