[bind10-dev] Class naming

[JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉]

At Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:05:57 -0500,
Michael Graff <mgraff at isc.org> wrote:
> 
> When I did the command channel stuff for OpenReg, I named the classes:
> 
>    ISC::CC::Message
>    ISC::CC::Group
> 
> etc.
> 
> Do we want to retain the ISC prefix?  If it is internal to us only, I 
> would say yes, but if we want our components to be more easily chopped 
> up and used outside of BIND 10, perhaps we want to not have it.

This is largely a matter of preference, and there won't be a single
right answer like in any bikeshed discussion.  So, not surprisingly,
I'd think we should rather retain some unique prefix if we want our
components to be used outside of BIND10 (and I thought we do) because,
as Evan indicated, it's better to avoid name conflict with other
packages that might be used with our components.

Whether "ISC" is the best name is a different question.  If we
even worry about conflicts with other ISC projects, we may want to
introduce "BIND" or "BIND10" prefix, with or without ISC.

> Example, Dnsruby doesn't use Nominet::Dnsruby.  However, the Amazon 
> protocols are nearly all prefixed with Amazon::.

As a data point, Mozilla requires the "mozzila" namespace within their
projects:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Mozilla_Coding_Style_Guide#Namespaces

---
JINMEI, Tatuya