"JF" == Jim Fulton <jim@digicool.com> writes:
>> I think we're safe from this for the forseeable future through >> convention and peer pressure. JF> 8^o JF> (I feel like I should respond to this in some way but .... JF> I just can't understand this kind of argument and don't JF> know how to frame a response.) Maybe I should have included half a smiley. Python may eventually need package naming rules as strict as Java's. I think it's a good idea now for those who are writing packages to consider trying to pick unique top-level package names. We might decide to release our stuff under the `cnri' top level package. That's probably unique enough. Or `koe', or if we're really paranoid us.va.reston.cnri.koe :-! Personally, I think `Mailman' as a top-level package name is pretty unique, so I don't plan to change what I'm doing there. -Barry