[csw-maintainers] Package length again

[Philip Brown]

On 11/19/10, Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> Am 19.11.2010 um 20:07 schrieb Philip Brown:
>>...
>> If you feel so strongly about the 1 char inequality for perl packages,
>> then perhaps instead you should adjust the perl naming spec ...
>>....
>> Then you once again have full parity between catalog and PKG name.
>> Plus it looks cleaner anyway. *and* matches what we are doing in other
>> areas, such as python module naming.
>
> Generally I agree. But would you agree renaming all packages? Having
> 80% old CSWpmabc packages and 20% new CSWpm-xyz packages seems to
> be the worst solution to me, although I really favor using more
> hyphens as it reduces ambiguity and eases reading.

perl modules seem to have a high rate of "churn". So I dont think this
is a bad thing: they will probably get mostly refreshed over the
course of the next 12 months anyway, I would guess, to approach 100%

I think the added benefit of consistency with py_ modules, makes this
the best choice.

The renaming IS going to be horrible, and yes I will probably get
sulky about it at times, because of the extra work that *I* will have
to do as well. :-}
But it is the right thing to do I think.