spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Library naming

2004-08-02 04:08:02

On 2 Aug 2004, at 11:42, Michael R. Brumm wrote:

I agree. This is what should have been done from the start.

Of course, this renaming effort would require a lot of work (that could be better spent on other things) and also create a bit of confusion, so I'm neither _for_ nor _against_ it at this point.

At the moment, SPF & SRS and related libraries are all still in development. This batch of name changes would be confusing only to those people who are running in-development software for an in-development spec; but it would alleviate the confusion of lots of end-users in the future. The perfect time to do this would have been from the very beginning, but if the choice is between doing it now and doing it later, doing it now is the right choice as it will require less work in total than doing it later would, as well as having much greater impact and reducing much more confusion.

Michael R. Brumm

// Christian Brunschen


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>