Front page | perl.modules |
Postings from May 2008
I haven't even noticed the Steffen's CC. Here is the response I've emailed Steffen back. ------ Hey I'm sorry for the long delay, and I appreciate your efforts to find my idea a suitable place. I've been considering your suggestions but I've figured that putting it in DBIx::WebAdmin while there's DBIx::Web and DBIx::Admin could create some confusion. And with all due respect (and hell, respect is due!) to Maypold, Catalyst, Mason and any other named project on CPAN, I prefer to use something that would: 1. give a feel as a module (because that's what I'm going for) 2. not scare anyone to think it's a completely separate application and 3. provide people with enough warmth to feel like they could extend and perfect it. I was thinking of putting it as Web::DBI or Web::Interface::DBI. That way people would understand the idea better and it might even drive a few to write a web interface to something else or extend what I'm doing. What do you think? I'm promptly open to suggestions. Also, I've gone over the Perl Foundation grant proposals and I saw Grant Grueninger had proposed the following: http://news.perlfoundation.org/2008/05/2008q2_grant_proposal_dbeditor.html I want to get in touch with him but it seems like he is looking for a grant on this. I wouldn't want to get in the way of it. Sorry for the hassle :) ---- Steffen then suggested to drop the redundancy in Web::Interface::DBI and Web::DBI - which I concurred to. I'm still more than open to any suggestions others may have. I apologize for the mix up with the emails. Sawyer. On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 11:56 PM, Steffen Mueller <wyp3rlx02@sneakemail.com> wrote: > brian d foy schrieb: > > > > In article <200805041307.m44D7DD7004566@pause.perl.org>, Perl Authors > > Upload Server <upload@pause.perl.org> wrote: > > > > > > > The following module was proposed for inclusion in the Module List: > > > > > > modid: Web::DBI > > > DSLIP: cdpOp > > > description: A web interface to DBI, finally. > > > userid: XSAWYERX (Sawyer X) > > > chapterid: 15 (World_Wide_Web_HTML_HTTP_CGI) > > > communities: > > > > > > > Steffen steered you toward some much better names: > > > > http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/modules/2008-05/msg00024.html > > > > The web namespace is usually used to connect to existing things on the > > web, so I don't see how your application fits there. > > > > Oops. Sawyer X dropped modules@ from the CC list. Short recap: We discussed > this further. > > Turns out, some of my initial ideas weren't so good. The existing > DBIx::HTML::* modules are unrelated, so that area's out. I wouldn't have > included "HTML" in the module name anyway. > > DBIx::Web and DBIx::Admin exist, so Sawyer X considered adding a third > DBIx::WebAdmin confusing. I tend to agree. > > That only left my suggestion to choose a catchy *name*, potentially > unrelated to the module purpose (such as Rosetta, etc.). > > I don't think there's a good place to put web applications right now. App:: > doesn't really seem right for web apps. Most apps are under their respective > web framework top level namespace such as Catalyst. That also seems wrong. > > Web:: isn't really crowded compared to WWW:: or WebService::. So I thought > it would be okay to use that top level namespace. > > Sorry if this is off. > > Cheers, > Steffen >Thread Previous