From: Gabriel Emerson <gemerson@...>
Date: 2003-01-24T04:45:02+09:00
Subject: Re: Can we attack the 'not enough libraries' thing straight on?

My only response is a vague one.  I mostly agree with you, re: naming and
stuff, but whatever we do I'd rather have something more like CPAN and
less like Vaults of Parnassus.

CPAN is more or less professional-looking.  Maybe it is the massive
hierarchy or the cool colons.  VoP looks like a grab bag.

If you want 5 Lisp interpreters, call them Lang::Lisp::Rouge,
Lang::Lisp::Lithp, whatever.  The category is important, the base name
isn't so much.  As long as you have a path to find them.

Now to address your actual post.  Maybe we should have a web site.  A
person can go in and request a CPAN module, based on their actual need for
it, maybe with a comment on why it would be a Good Thing To Have.  People
could respond with the names of existing modules and why they fit the
bill, or someone could volunteer to write it, and maintain a progress bar.

As far as slavishly copying CPAN APIs, sometimes that's a good idea, and
sometimes it's a really bad idea.  As far as copying the guts, I'd almost
always advocate doing it from scratch using Ruby best practices.  Hacking
around nasty Perlisms is no fun.

We now have WriteExcel thanks to someone just adopting a module and
porting it.  It's not like it's impossible to do.

My alternative solution is to just stop talking about CPAN around dblack.

--Gabriel