Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Message-ID: <001701c35848$3054a890$0400a8c0@hw0393>
From: "Guido Casper" <gcasper@s-und-n.de>
To: <dev@cocoon.apache.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0308011225350.7783-100000@vern.chem.tu-berlin.de>
Subject: Re: Promotion of [XPath]TraversableGenerators to main trunk
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 18:15:53 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

Stephan Michels wrote:
> At least, we should agree on one name
>
> SourceHierarchyGenerator -> http://apache.org/cocoon/hierachy/1.0
> SourceCollectionGenerator -> http://apache.org/cocoon/collection/1.0
> SourceDirectoryGenerator -> http://apache.org/cocoon/directory/1.0
>
> or DirectoryGenerator.

Probably I should shut up and sit down before adding yet another opinion but
FWIW I prefer DirectoryGenerator. It's most user-friendly (immediately
understood by everyone) and compatible. I can already imagine:

"What the heck is SourceHierarchyGenerator"
"A DirectoryGenerator for other sources as well"
:-)

I see no strong reason to rename DirectoryGenerator just because now it
operates on other sources as well. It is semantically as correct as the
other.

The next step is renaming FileGenerator? Although this would even make more
sense. But given that these components will mostly be used for the
filesystem for a long time to come ...

But I'm fine with any of these names.

Guido