From: Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain.joyeux@...>
Date: 2007-04-20T05:20:12+09:00
Subject: Re: Project vs. Package

>   require 'traits', :project => 'codeforpeople', :package =>
> 'traits', :version => '>= 0.10'
I think this is over-engineering for a very marginal problem. 

If you have a 'heap' library, you usually don't want it to be top-level, 
because heaps are a general thing and it is very likely that you heap is 
not compatible with another's, so
  require 'heap', :project => 'coolproject'
and
  require 'heap', :project => 'anothercoolproject'
are NOT equivalent. For this kind of library, it is IMO not that horrible 
to have to type
  require 'coolproject/heap'

If you're defining a big library, it can be put in the 'toplevel' 
namespace, because the first one that will use a name will own it.

This works for a very long time in C (with both library names and 
includes). Of course, there are problems but I really think what you're 
trying to do is overkill for a very limited problem.

I don't know what's your problem with more's libraries being in more. I 
personally don't see one.
-- 
Sylvain Joyeux