From: Nat Pryce <nat.pryce@...13media.com>
Date: 2001-12-05T21:10:05+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:27543] Re: Package Naming

From: "Rik Hemsley" <rik@kde.org>
> #if Jim Menard
> > What I find tedious is that I am neither a company nor an organization.
I
> > don't own a domain name or company name. Therefore, I can't really
create a
> > "legit" package name. I haven't had anyone complain about "jimm.foo" but
> > jimm.{com,net,org,info} are already taken.
>
> Aren't the actual words irrelevant ? I can't imagine Java does a lookup
> on the domain name before it loads your code :)
>
> Surely 'menard.jim.xml.grok' would be fine ?

The actual words *are* relevant because by using valid domain names avoids
name clash without needing to set up another global naming authority.  The
disadvantage is that developers have to have a domain name; there is no
escape mechanism.  Another disadvantage is that packages are not named by
their functionality, except those in the java and javax packages.

How will packages by named?  Who will organise them into the hierarchy?  If
it is up to individual developers. there is still the danger of name clash
and miscategorisation.  If it is up to a central authority, it will take
time to get a package name approved. IMHO, any package naming convention for
Ruby must include an "escape mechanism" that can be used to name packages
without categorising them into the official package hierarchy, but with the
understanding that there may be name clashes.  Sort of like the "x-" prefix
for MIME types.

Cheers,
            Nat.

________________________________
Dr. Nathaniel Pryce
B13media Ltd.
40-41 Whiskin St, London, EC1R 0BP, UK
http://www.b13media.com

XP Day, London, UK. 15th December 2001. http://xpday.xpdeveloper.com/