On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Duncan McGreggor <duncan.mcgreggor@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 2:27 PM, <glyph@divmod.com> wrote:
On 12:14 am, duncan.mcgreggor@gmail.com wrote:
Man, I think you totally hit it on the nose with your "tx" suggestion: tx.snmp, tx.storage. I maintain the Twisted-JSONRPC package, and I will change the namespace from twisted.web.jsonrpc to tx.jsonrpc. Not only does it have a cool sound, entails "TwistedmatriX", is associated with "transmit", but it could also stand for "Twisted eXtensions" (in the "add on" sense).
Thanks for the encouragement :) but a minor point: I think it's important that these packages use 'py' in the same way most projects do, since sharing namespaces in Python is such a pain. i.e. in pygame you do 'import pygame', in pygtk you do 'import gtk'. The existence of the separate 'py' library / namespace complicates matters somewhat, but that's a single entity that has nothing to do with 99% of the PyFoo projects out there.
Hrm. I really like the idea of the community sharing a namespace. But maybe that's just my software hippy/commune side coming out...
So these names would be 'txjsonrpc', 'txsnmp', 'txstorage', et. al.
As a name, I don't know what appeals to me more... txJSONRPC, TxJSONRPC, txjsonrpc. As a namespace, I really do like tx.jsonrpc ;-)
I've been playing with this for a couple days now, and as the only way (that I know of) to support a large, shared namespace in python is to require the use of setuptools, and given that so many object to its use, I've bailed on tx.jsonrpc and have simply used txjsonrpc and txJSON-RPC in my project. d