In <429(_at_)rama(_dot_)pamho(_dot_)net> "Roger Moser"
<Roger(_dot_)Moser(_at_)rama(_dot_)pamho(_dot_)net> writes:
Christian wrote:
*Both* the 'libspf' and 'libspf2' projects should be renamed, in such a
way that they use names that cannot be confused, and also such that
neither name will be inherently more official-looking or more generic
than the other.
I agree. Let me repeat my suggestion:
Simply do it as I have done it. I named my SPF library "RMSPF", where "RM"
are my initials. James names his libraries "JCSPF" and "JCSRS". Wayne names
his library "WSSPF". And Shevek names his library "SHSRS".
I'm afraid that this library naming issue is a case where the golden
rule ("Do onto others as you would have them do onto you.") doesn't
always work. It is clear that some people are much more sensitive to
library naming issues than others.
For example, quite a while ago, someone created a libsrs-alt, the same
naming scheme that I used for my SPF implementation. This didn't
bother me in the slightest and I barely paid passing attention to the
name.
As I have mentioned before, I chose to combine efforts with Shevek and
his SRS implementation because I asked both James and Shevek if they
could work with the other. Shevek instantly said "yes", James
eventually said "no", but not without a lot of evasion first. If both
had said "yes", I would be working with both of them now.
The libsrs-alt name did, however, create a small amount of problems
when Shevek and I decided to work together. He could not rename his
library to match mine, so I renamed mine to match his. Apparently,
the naming issues bothers James a heck of a lot more than it bothers
me.
The suggestion that names and/or initials should be used in the
library names does not seem to be a good idea to me. There are
already several people with commit access to the combined code base
(and I'm interested in adding others), so naming things based on any
one individual wouldn't make sense.
Thanks to the efforts of many people, we have had a tremendous growth
in the usage of the libspf2 and libsrs2 implementations. It is
substantially harder to rename things now than it was a month or two
ago.
James says that this is now a dead issue for him. Maybe we can move
on now.
-wayne