How about "PWAN", the "package without a name"? ;)
-----Original Message----- From: distutils-sig-admin@python.org [mailto:distutils-sig-admin@python.org]On Behalf Of Greg Ward Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 5:34 PM To: distutils-sig@python.org; python-dev@python.org Subject: [Distutils] Terminology question
A question of terminology: frequently in the Distutils docs I need to refer to the package-that-is-not-a-package, ie. the "root" or "empty" package. I can't decide if I prefer "root package", "empty package" or what. ("Empty" just means the *name* is empty, so it's probably not a very good thing to say "empty package" -- but "package with no name" or "unnamed package" aren't much better.)
Is there some accepted convention that I have missed?
Here's the definition I've just written for the "Distribution Python Modules" manual:
\item[root package] the ``package'' that modules not in a package live in. The vast majority of the standard library is in the root package, as are many small, standalone third-party modules that don't belong to a larger module collection. (The root package isn't really a package, since it doesn't have an \file{\_\_init\_\_.py} file. But we have to call it something.)
Confusing enough? I thought so...
Greg -- Greg Ward - Unix nerd gward@python.net http://starship.python.net/~gward/ Beware of altruism. It is based on self-deception, the root of all evil.
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://www.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig