Mailing-List: contact dev-help@perl.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021125073111.024ebd18@localhost>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 07:33:06 +0100
To: Stas Bekman <stas@stason.org>
From: Per Einar Ellefsen <pereinar@oslo.online.no>
Subject: Re: rfc: top level 2.0 CPAN modules naming
Cc: dev@perl.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <3DE18FFE.5000305@stason.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 03:50 25.11.2002, Stas Bekman wrote:
>I'm going to release a first 2.0 module on CPAN. I'm wondering about the 
>top level namespace naming.
>
>I suggest the following spec:
>
>*** Core 2.0 modules
>
>Apache::   -- Apache API
>APR::      -- APR API
>ModPerl::  -- ModPerl API
>
>(we have this already in place)
>
>*** 3rd party modules
>
>ModPerl::   -- Working with 1.0 and 2.0
>ModPerl2::  -- Working only with 2.0
>
>modules that work with 1.0 should work under 2.0 as-is under prefork mpm.
>
>the '2' in ModPerl2 is very essential to hint CPAN users that this module 
>is for mod_perl 2.0 only. In the future we might have ModPerl3::, which 
>will work only with mod_perl 3.0. (who's the 3.0 pumpkin, btw? :)
>
>So if that's cool with you guys, at some point I'm going to release on 
>CPAN ModPerl2::Filter::Snoop or something like that.
>
>We end up with CPAN having both Apache:: and ModPerl:: namespaces, but 
>c'est la vie.

I did publish a spec already, but that was more for the organization of the 
namespace. I agree with you that we need some way to distinguish 2.0 from 
1.0 modules. ModPerl2:: seems like a good idea. We just need to update the 
specs at 
http://perl.apache.org/products/apache-modules.html#Module_Naming_Conventions 
with whatever we choose.


-- 
Per Einar Ellefsen
pereinar@oslo.online.no


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@perl.apache.org