[bind10-dev] Class naming

[Shane Kerr]

All,

On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 21:05 -0700, JINMEI Tatuya / 神明達哉 wrote:
> 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.

Jinmei is right... this is probably a bikeshed discussion. However, I
think we do want *some* namespace.

I don't think we will have too much problem with conflicts with other
ISC projects. If we do, we can use the traditional method to resolve
such an issue:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyhhFzE5O5U

I also understand and accept the wisdom of what Evan says regarding
name-spaces. Mozilla uses "mozilla", Boost uses "boost". Perhaps we
should use "isc"?

--
Shane