Re: Discussion of SCM_SVN Proposal
| From: | Bertrand Mansion | Date: | Fri, 16 Apr 2004 13:50:34 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Discussion of SCM_SVN Proposal | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-27777@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
<alan@akbkhome.com> wrote :
> Chuck Hagenbuch wrote:
>> Quoting Tobias Schlitt <tobias@schlitt.info>:
>>
>>> No, please start naming correctly in the manor of
>>> <Category>_<Packagename>. There will be an RFC for correct naming today
>>> evening.
>>
>>
>> Then there needs to be many, many more top-level categories. Making
>> Tools_ a
>> part of a bunch of classnames is just plain silly.
>
> This does make sense.. - although the Category should not really be
> abbreviations eg.(Conf), or acronims (VCS), good clear names
>
> I'm not sure about the 100% category -> prefixing
>
> The category is for pearweb really.. - the prefixing is more to prevent
> use killing the global class namespace.
Or maybe Versioning_SVN, Versioning_Subversion ?
Bertrand Mansion
Mamasam