From: Mark Hahn <mchahn@...>
Date: 2001-12-06T03:07:51+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:27579] Re: Package Naming

But it is possible, if unlikely, that someone would pick the same name.

Basicly, if you pick a decent name, I.E. not grok, then the odds are good
someone else is going to pick the same name.  This is not a problem when a
community is Ruby's size, but we do expect Ruby to grow, right?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rik Hemsley" <rik@kde.org>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 2:54 AM
Subject: [ruby-talk:27540] Re: Package Naming


> #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 ?
>
> Rik
>