in reply to Re^2: Is it worth tracking down absent cpan owners?
in thread Is it worth tracking down absent cpan owners?

Thanks for the clarification, I was not aware of all the little details of the indexer.

If I understand it correctly: the author decides on the name of the module (e.g. RegAgent) and he puts this under a namespace (e.g. Sybase) which is not his property (is it CPAN's?) and the indexer joins this all together and adds a version number.

From a legal point of view it doesn't change much as you --depending on the kind of licence-- probably still are not allowed to "update/upgrade" the module and publish it under the same author-given name. If the only difference is the version number, it is probably not enough to sail clear of legal problems with ownership and copyright of the "name".

CountZero

"If you have four groups working on a compiler, you'll get a 4-pass compiler." - Conway's Law

  • Comment on Re^3: Is it worth tracking down absent cpan owners?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Is it worth tracking down absent cpan owners?
by adamk (Chaplain) on Aug 31, 2006 at 03:38 UTC
    No, this is not the case.

    There's two parts to this, the module namespace and the actual distribution.

    The distribution is essentially the tarball (sorta).

    It will have a name like Sybase-RegAgent-1.tar.gz

    However, as far as the database is concerned, it has a "name" of "Sybase-RegAgent".

    Within that distribution, there will be one or more modules/classes. In this case, by convention only, it will probably have Sybase::RegAgent. It may also have Sybase::RegAgent::SomethingElse, and it might also have completely different classes like Some::Thing::Else.

    The naming of the distribution is entirely orthogonal to the modules inside it, and the namespaces it uses.

    For example, the distribution named "mod_perl" has modules like Apache2::Something.

    The namespace is only property in the most general sense.

    The CPAN looks to the index for what module is in what distribution and installs whatever distribution the index says.

    A client using a different CPAN (should you set up an alternative one) would install something different. You can also override it at any time you like.

    So possibly "property" in the sense that a domain name is property. And since there are no legal transfer of ownership, the entire namespace of CPAN is probably really "owned" by Andreas, the guy that created the CPAN.

    If it's true there's issues with reusing the "name", the new maintainer could certainly rename the distribution and continue using the same module names without issue.

    But then CPAN is a practical place. Until the day that someone cares, we'll keep doing what works. And the truth is that so far nobody cares. :)
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom