RE: [PEAR-QA] New package DataGrid
| From: | Andrew S. Nagy | Date: | Tue, 16 Mar 2004 16:55:08 +0000 |
| Subject: | RE: [PEAR-QA] New package DataGrid | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.pear.qa |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-qa+get-962@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lukas Smith [mailto:smith@backendmedia.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 11:26 AM
>
> Stephan Schmidt wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >>That is what I saw as the name in the PEPr proposal anyways:
> >>Structures::DataGrid
> >
> >
> > I guess the problem is that there is no rule, whether a package name has
> > to contain the category.
>
> Well yes there are a few things we need to clarify in the manual.
> However its an unwritten rule :-)
>
One thing that I am thinking about as I prepare for the name change, are the
comments that Joe Stump made on the developers list. Could the name
"Structures_DataGrid" harm in the marketing of this package? As this
package (i hope) has a lot of potential for HTML developers, I would want to
market this package as much as possible. Maybe my thought process is being
skewed by my corporate thinking as I am at work right now, but I am curious
if people would be more welcoming to use a toolkit called "PEAR::DataGrid"
as aposed to "PEAR::Structures_DataGrid"? Does the "Structures_" take away
from the "branding"?
I am very willing to change the name to Structures_DataGrid as there are
standards trying to be put forth, but I would just like others feedback on
this.
Thank you for all of your help and patience
Andrew>