[PD] inconsistencies with lib names (was: representning classes and selectors in the wiki)

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On Sep 17, 2007, at 12:21 PM, Frank Barknecht wrote:

> Hallo,
> Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>
>> Call me an anarchist, but I believe that we can do it without an
>> editor-in-chief.  It just takes some communication and mutual
>> respect.  We've gotten this far with the whole Pd-extended collection
>> without an editor-in-chief.
>
> Unless one considers you to be the pd-extended editor-in-chief. ;)

Yeah... I think that's part of the problem with Pd-extended, that I  
have been the de facto editor-in-chief.  I think it'll work much  
better as more people get involved.  I can't keep up on the details  
of everyone's libs... :D

> An editor-in-chief wouldn't need to be a real person. A wiki page or a
> textfile in cvs/svn would be enough plus some simple rules.
> Registering a namespace name would be as simple as writing the name
> one wants to use plus a contact in there.
>
> Possible simple rules could be:
>
> * announcements should go to pd-dev before registering.
> * otherwise first come, first serve.
> * everthing that starts with "NAME/" is reserved to the registered
>   project.
> * every class that is registered should always be used with "NAME/".
>
> Additionaly rules could be:
>
> * NAMES must start with letter or digit and be all lowercase.
> * NAMES starting with an _underscore are for private use (and cannot
>   be registered)
>
> Only remaning issue would be that generic/functional names like "math"
> or "std" or "pd" are tricky, because they might be needed for a real
> std-namespace later. Vendor-based names like "footils" are easier in
> this regard, but mnemonics are worse.

This all sounds excellent, I think this is exactly what would work  
well.  As for choosing standard namespace names, I think that we  
should follow the lazy consensus rule, with required discussion,  
i.e., standard lib names should not be automatically accepted unless  
there is discussion.

In order for things to get done, I think we need "project leads",  
which have similar duties to an editor-in-chief, but I think it  
should be more like a community organizer who focuses on organizing  
things like the rules for a given library.  A key difference would be  
that a project lead would not have the complete authority of a editor- 
in-chief.  The mob that is the Pd community would always have some  
say if we want. :)

.hc

>
> Ciao
> -- 
>  Frank Barknecht                 _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ 
> listinfo/pd-list



------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
----

"[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are  
deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from  
scarcity."        -John Gilmore