[spambayes-dev] Names & 1.0a6 release

[Meyer, Tony]

> I don't feel strongly either way, but if it came to a vote 
> I'd vote for using the sb_ prefix and adding the scripts to a 
> standard location on the PATH.

I think it was only Skip that (owned up to) leaning towards the separate
directory, and he's said he's not that bothered, so I suppose we go with
this.

> [FWIW, I preferred sb- as a prefix, and we could have used it 
> by stripping  the scripts down to an "import spambayes.xxx; 
> spambayes.xxx.main()", but  I don't feel strongly about that 
> either.  Get off the fence, Richie!]

It was my bumbling that caused this.  I should have tested everything
properly with the sb- prefix before I started making changes to cvs, and
then I could have posted a message to the list asking which we
preferred.  But I didn't even consider that there might be a problem
with the new names, and so checked in the changes.  Once I did find the
problem, I'd already removed the old ones, so I was left with either
un-removing them, or making the switch.

I also like the sb- prefix more, but stripping down the scripts was way
more work.  It would have had the additional advantage of the majority
of the code being precompiled, though.

Given that my initial checkin has cluttered up the scripts attic
already, it wouldn't be that big a deal to make the change back to sb-,
although we'd have to add a whole heap of scripts containing the bulk of
the code (to the spambayes directory?).  Would people prefer this?

(Couldn't we just fix Python to allow the sb- prefix <wink>?)

=Tony Meyer