Re: Good package name for Winamp module?

I think it was a less than ideal choice for the author of Winamp::Control to create a Winamp:: namespace. I'd go for Audio::Winamp::Control; maybe in your case Audio::Winamp::Control::Direct.

Rationale:

Audio It has to do with audio software. Audio is a well-known namespace.
Direct The fact that you use Win32::API is not quite relevant to the user. I would rather emphasize that no additional plugin is needed. Admittedly, Direct is not a good choice. It's the best I can think of :)

Comment on Re: Good package name for Winamp module?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: Re: Good package name for Winamp module?
by PodMaster (Abbot) on Mar 13, 2003 at 11:08 UTC

The Winamp namespace already exists, so he should reuse it, and not introduce yet another namespace.

Direct isn't very meaningful, and at least Win32 or Win32API signifies which platform it works on.

MJD says you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!
I run a Win32 PPM repository for perl 5.6x+5.8x. I take requests.
** The Third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.