Re: [Zope] - Re: Name clashes (PIL vs Zope)...
I'd love to use PIL. I'd like it even more if the PIL community was less antagonistic.
Well, either you change the name or I do. I don't see how I can do that without causing an enormous amount of trouble for all existing users of PIL (including ourselves and our paying customers, some of which are using it with pre-1.5 versions of Python). After all, we've used the "Image" prefix since 1995, and this is the first time anyone has reported a nameclash. Suggestions are welcome, but don't expect me to undertake a massive renaming/restructuring effort if that can be avoided. Maybe in 2.0. /F
[ namespace problem with Zope and PIL ] Actually this problem should probably be a wake-up call for the Python community to address the issue properly, which is related to what Greg Ward is organizing in the dist-sig. Zope/PIL gives us the first real-world example of what can occur when the issue is left dormant. Java has addressed the issue by using Internet domains to assign namespaces, e.g.: com.pythonware.pil org.zope.zope But this wasn't popular when suggested earlier. and-probably-not-too-popular-now-either-ly yr's, Jeff Bauer Rubicon, Inc.
On Fri, Jan 29, 1999 at 09:07:16AM -0600, Jeff Bauer wrote:
[ namespace problem with Zope and PIL ]
Actually this problem should probably be a wake-up call for the Python community to address the issue properly, which is related to what Greg Ward is organizing in the dist-sig. Zope/PIL gives us the first real-world example of what can occur when the issue is left dormant.
Actually, I think one thing that would help (no offense /F) is that everyone should put their code in packages, for example, I recently ran into a problem with HTMLgen, since it doesn't do this, and it has a file named the same as something else I wrote... big nono... I reaise packages are a tiny bit more troublesome to write than anything else, and a tiny tiny bit more difficult to use, but... BTW, Robin Dunn uses a naming scheme TCS.packagename for the BSD DB support and I've certainly had no problems with it. I think the proliferation of Java has aclimated people to using a more um... "verbose" scheme. That doesn't mean I'm saying that all the standard stuff should be moved into org.python.string or whatever But maybe it should? THAT would definately be a Python 2.0 thing. Chris -- | Christopher Petrilli | petrilli@amber.org
participants (3)
-
Christopher G. Petrilli -
Fredrik Lundh -
Jeff Bauer